[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by Guibo

Hold on a moment, I think that's the sound of Ferrari saying they'll no longer produce cars like the 599/612, Bentley/Spyker/Rolls-Royce/etc, throwing in the towel.

Just think you get a little to caught up in the LFA fanboy world with comments like this.

LFA is no reason to make any company throw in the towel. The LFA doesn't lead in any single performance category.

Fact is there is already cars the beat it. There will be cars in future that crush it. The LFA is not what some of you make it out to be.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

Not talking about the California.

Simply put the 458 italia, produces more hp and tq, with 2 less cylinders and less displacement. Just the facts. It happens to out accelerate the LFA too.

Simply put the LFA is not a game changer.
Guess you haven't read publications or been on internet the last few years.

Wait, you said Ferrari's entry level car. Are you now saying that the 458 is Ferrari's entry level car?

On-paper facts have little bearing on what people in the $400k segment are willing to buy. They buy on what appeals to them on an emotional level. For some people, they don't care about Ferrari. It's called personal preferrence. Ever heard of it?

I have been reading publication and been on the internet. Guess you missed the part where I asked for links/sources of Toyota claiming the LFA would be a game-changer or objective performance benchmark.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

Just think you get a little to caught up in the LFA fanboy world with comments like this.

LFA is no reason to make any company throw in the towel. The LFA doesn't lead in any single performance category.

Did you think I was serious when I made that comment? Please don't tell me you think I was being serious. Anyone of reasonable mind could see I was using sarcasm to make a point.
If objective performance were all that mattered, nobody would buy a Murcielago SV, BMW M6, Audi R8, Ferrari or Porsche Turbo in a world where the ZR1 exists. GM and Dodge (with its ACR) would have put them out of business. Yet look at the paltry ZR1 sales last year (even in a depressed economy) and the Viper's head on the chopping block...

[Guibo]

Haha, "proof" that the M3 is a waste of money only for suckers.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/16/2...w-m3-tie-game/

[991GT3]

Originally Posted by Guibo

It has everything to do with supply and demand, which supports the notion that something is only worth what people are willing to pay for it. You are saying the car is not worth $400k, Lexus's asking price for this car. Well, if Lexus are only supplying 500 @ $400k a pop, and they sell (and then some), then doesn't that refute your notion that the car isn't worth $400k? Your definition of "worth" clearly is in contradiction to free-market concepts of supply and demand. But we could predict as much, because your definition hinges on performance/$ when the simple fact is, not everyone looking at a $400k car is going to be taking it to the track or dragstrip. Hell, there are entire car markets in the $400k segment that don't give a rat's ass about 1/4 mile or laptimes. So long as performance is sufficient, people in this segment don't care if Car A is faster by 0.xyz seconds than Car B on Track 020b.
The implication you're also making is that Lexus are somehow being greedy in trying to recoup some development costs on the project. Based on the relatively paltry revenue raised by this project, do you honestly think they're being greedy?

I don't want to get in a remedial economics debate but supply and demand is an equalizer. A one off loser isn't good economics.
And don't kid yourself this wasn't what Toyota had in mind when they started this project.
And I have never said Toyota was being greedy. I said the car isn't worth the money IMO. This was a costly venture that didn't pan out. It happens.
Hopefully some of this technology will filter down to upcoming sports cars in their lineup.

[BMW F22]

997GT3- no offense but it sounds like you're trying to convince yourself that the GT-R is the best car in the world. The GT-R is a great car but the LF-A is just epic. Remember the last time Toyota put out a sports car (supra)? It became one of the most sought after cars in the world.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by 997GT3

I don't want to get in a remedial economics debate but supply and demand is an equalizer. A one off loser isn't good economics.
And don't kid yourself this wasn't what Toyota had in mind when they started this project.
Hopefully some of this technology will filter down to upcoming sports cars in their lineup.

Forget about sports cars. That's not going to sustain Toyota in the long term. If lower-end mass-market cars like the iQ, Yaris, Corolla, Camry, etc. benefit from low-cost CF manufacturing, then we can't write off this project as a loser.
The LFA was meant to be a halo car, one that (along with the IS-F) would help change Lexus's reputation as a maker of competent, but ultimately dull, driving appliances. Lexus has been noted for build quality, features & amenities, smoothness, impeccable dealer service, yes. But passion? No. Now that they have more buyers than supply in a $400k market, can even stipulate lease-only terms in a major automotive market, have writers the globe over singing praises of quality, sound, responses and Scuderia-levels of involvement, not to mention countless interweb debates...did they not succeed in building a halo car that raises the brand's awareness?
Based on the various iterations of this car (some with considerably different styling details), mid-engined variants, V8 experiments as well as the original aluminum construction, I'd say Toyota probably did not have this in mind when they started the project.

You do realize that the GT-R is a money-loser too, don't you? And taking your logic to its conclusion, the F430, Porsche Turbo/GT3, Zonda F, Gallardo/Murcielago, R8, V12 Vantage, are all not worth the money when the cheaper, faster alternatives like the ZR1 and ACR exist.

[f=ma]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

Stop dodging the question. WHY would you pay it?

What does this car bring to the table over a Zonda? It's no more exclusive (because if you're going to argue that $100k is nothing, I'm going to say that the difference between selling 300 cars worldwide and selling 500 cars worldwide is also nothing), it doesn't perform any better, and it damn sure not going to turn heads any faster.

I simply do not see ANYTHING that this car brings to the table to justify the asking price. The notion that people who are this wealth have no concern for price is also bunk. If that were true they'd all just buy Veyrons and be done with it.

cause zonda and koenigsegg in USA are not legal and have to brought in through the "Show and Display" law, which btw cost a fucking lot.

[Inspired]

Originally Posted by BMW E90

997GT3- no offense but it sounds like you're trying to convince yourself that the GT-R is the best car in the world. The GT-R is a great car but the LF-A is just epic. Remember the last time Toyota put out a sports car (supra)? It became one of the most sought after cars in the world.

I'm not surprised since he owns one. GTR fan boy?

[991GT3]

Originally Posted by BMW E90

997GT3- no offense but it sounds like you're trying to convince yourself that the GT-R is the best car in the world. The GT-R is a great car but the LF-A is just epic. Remember the last time Toyota put out a sports car (supra)? It became one of the most sought after cars in the world.

Where in this thread did I say it was the best car in the world? It certainly has its flaws but it has turned the sports cars world upside down.
Why? Because it is an attainable supercar.
The LFA is a low production show car. It doesn't have the same impact as the Nissan. Get the price down and production up and you might have a point but that's not happening.

[SantaPimp27]

Originally Posted by BMW E90

997GT3- no offense but it sounds like you're trying to convince yourself that the GT-R is the best car in the world. The GT-R is a great car but the LF-A is just epic. Remember the last time Toyota put out a sports car (supra)? It became one of the most sought after cars in the world.

But the supra was like $40K when it came out. 2JZ is also the best engine ever built

[991GT3]

Originally Posted by twinturbo335

I'm not surprised since he owns one. GTR fan boy?

I have no allegiance to any car. I have owned an M3, M6, CLS55, CLK63 Black, GTR, and now have a GT3 on order. Every one of those cars has a weakness or two including the Nissan.

[b0bab0i]

Originally Posted by 997GT3

I don't want to get in a remedial economics debate but supply and demand is an equalizer. A one off loser isn't good economics.
And don't kid yourself this wasn't what Toyota had in mind when they started this project.
And I have never said Toyota was being greedy. I said the car isn't worth the money IMO. This was a costly venture that didn't pan out. It happens.
Hopefully some of this technology will filter down to upcoming sports cars in their lineup.

Originally Posted by Guibo

Forget about sports cars. That's not going to sustain Toyota in the long term. If lower-end mass-market cars like the iQ, Yaris, Corolla, Camry, etc. benefit from low-cost CF manufacturing, then we can't write off this project as a loser.
The LFA was meant to be a halo car, one that (along with the IS-F) would help change Lexus's reputation as a maker of competent, but ultimately dull, driving appliances. Lexus has been noted for build quality, features & amenities, smoothness, impeccable dealer service, yes. But passion? No. Now that they have more buyers than supply in a $400k market, can even stipulate lease-only terms in a major automotive market, have writers the globe over singing praises of quality, sound, responses and Scuderia-levels of involvement, not to mention countless interweb debates...did they not succeed in building a halo car that raises the brand's awareness?
Based on the various iterations of this car (some with considerably different styling details), mid-engined variants, V8 experiments as well as the original aluminum construction, I'd say Toyota probably did not have this in mind when they started the project.

You do realize that the GT-R is a money-loser too, don't you? And taking your logic to its conclusion, the F430, Porsche Turbo/GT3, Zonda F, Gallardo/Murcielago, R8, V12 Vantage, are all not worth the money when the cheaper, faster alternatives like the ZR1 and ACR exist.

997GT3 got owned

[BMW F22]

Originally Posted by 997GT3

Where in this thread did I say it was the best car in the world? It certainly has its flaws but it has turned the sports cars world upside down.
Why? Because it is an attainable supercar.
The LFA is a low production show car. It doesn't have the same impact as the Nissan. Get the price down and production up and you might have a point but that's not happening.

Seriously? You nitpick about the fact that you didn't explicitly say that the GT-R is the best car yet the only argument you have is that the GT-R is simply more attainable? Just because a 335 is more attainable than an M3 doesn't necessarily make it better (even though the M3 handles better and is faster).

To each his own though. You are entitled to your opinion but please don't try to force it on us. Enjoy your GT-R and let us drool over the LF-A.

[991GT3]

Originally Posted by Guibo

Forget about sports cars. That's not going to sustain Toyota in the long term. If lower-end mass-market cars like the iQ, Yaris, Corolla, Camry, etc. benefit from low-cost CF manufacturing, then we can't write off this project as a loser.
The LFA was meant to be a halo car, one that (along with the IS-F) would help change Lexus's reputation as a maker of competent, but ultimately dull, driving appliances. Lexus has been noted for build quality, features & amenities, smoothness, impeccable dealer service, yes. But passion? No. Now that they have more buyers than supply in a $400k market, can even stipulate lease-only terms in a major automotive market, have writers the globe over singing praises of quality, sound, responses and Scuderia-levels of involvement, not to mention countless interweb debates...did they not succeed in building a halo car that raises the brand's awareness?
Based on the various iterations of this car (some with considerably different styling details), mid-engined variants, V8 experiments as well as the original aluminum construction, I'd say Toyota probably did not have this in mind when they started the project.

You do realize that the GT-R is a money-loser too, don't you? And taking your logic to its conclusion, the F430, Porsche Turbo/GT3, Zonda F, Gallardo/Murcielago, R8, V12 Vantage, are all not worth the money when the cheaper, faster alternatives like the ZR1 and ACR exist.

I don't believe the GTR is a money loser but I'll research that. Ghosn's goal was to make it a profitable car and the price has crept up because they wanted to keep it in the black.
As far as the LFA is concerned let's just agree that its a nice car. I just don't think its worth that kind of money whereas you do. Which is fine. I think if they would have ramped production to put it in the $200-250 range they'd have a winner but not limited production $400k price point.

[Cdnrockies]

Originally Posted by Guibo

Forget about sports cars. That's not going to sustain Toyota in the long term. If lower-end mass-market cars like the iQ, Yaris, Corolla, Camry, etc. benefit from low-cost CF manufacturing, then we can't write off this project as a loser.
The LFA was meant to be a halo car, one that (along with the IS-F) would help change Lexus's reputation as a maker of competent, but ultimately dull, driving appliances. Lexus has been noted for build quality, features & amenities, smoothness, impeccable dealer service, yes. But passion? No. Now that they have more buyers than supply in a $400k market, can even stipulate lease-only terms in a major automotive market, have writers the globe over singing praises of quality, sound, responses and Scuderia-levels of involvement, not to mention countless interweb debates...did they not succeed in building a halo car that raises the brand's awareness?
Based on the various iterations of this car (some with considerably different styling details), mid-engined variants, V8 experiments as well as the original aluminum construction, I'd say Toyota probably did not have this in mind when they started the project.

You do realize that the GT-R is a money-loser too, don't you? And taking your logic to its conclusion, the F430, Porsche Turbo/GT3, Zonda F, Gallardo/Murcielago, R8, V12 Vantage, are all not worth the money when the cheaper, faster alternatives like the ZR1 and ACR exist.

Excellent post.

[991GT3]

Originally Posted by BMW E90

Seriously? You nitpick about the fact that you didn't explicitly say that the GT-R is the best car yet the only argument you have is that the GT-R is simply more attainable? Just because a 335 is more attainable than an M3 doesn't necessarily make it better (even though the M3 handles better and is faster).

To each his own though. You are entitled to your opinion but please don't try to force it on us. Enjoy your GT-R and let us drool over the LF-A.

That's not nitpicking. The GTR is a great car and probably the most significant sports car rolled out in the past 10 years but that doesn't make it the greatest sports car. If the LFA and the GTR were even remotely close in price I would easily pick the Lexus over the Nissan.
But that's the problem. The lexus costs 5-6 times as much.
To actually argue that a $80k car that burns around the 'ring under 7:30 isn't great is absurd. That is a monumental thing for a car under $150k let alone an $80k car.
And are you telling me to quit commenting on a thread I started because you don't like my opinion?

[991GT3]

Originally Posted by benmoooon

997GT3 got owned

How do you figure? The LFA was an on again off again project that is losing money. You can blather on about that it was a halo car until you're blue in the face but Toyota wasn't in it to lose money.

[f=ma]

Originally Posted by 997GT3

How do you figure? The LFA was an on again off again project that is losing money. You can blather on about that it was a halo car until you're blue in the face but Toyota wasn't in it to lose money.

lol

[Cdnrockies]

Originally Posted by 997GT3

How do you figure? The LFA was an on again off again project that is losing money. You can blather on about that it was a halo car until you're blue in the face but Toyota wasn't in it to lose money.

Once again you clearly show you have no idea what you're talking about. As has already been pointed out to you there have been multiple supercars that have been built that lose money.

Lexus by limiting sales to 500 units capped their potential return on investment at $200M....do you really think that they thought they could get into the supercar/exotic market for less than that??? Now who's the gullible one.

The cost is reported to be closer to $1B and will have far more effect on the rest of Toyota and Lexus as a brand than the 500 LF A's. They have now shown they are capable of competing with anyone and that they can do more than just comfortable luxury.

But feel free to keep talking out of your ass. It's clear you haven't done any actual research on the car.

P.S. I agree that the GT-R is a gamechanger as far as pushing other companies further. But while it puts down some impressive numbers it doesn't get in the same ballpark as most of the exotics. Great car, but not in the same class as the LF A.

[991GT3]

Originally Posted by Cdnrockies

Once again you clearly show you have no idea what you're talking about. As has already been pointed out to you there have been multiple supercars that have been built that lose money.

Lexus by limiting sales to 500 units capped their potential return on investment at $200M....do you really think that they thought they could get into the supercar/exotic market for less than that??? Now who's the gullible one.

The cost is reported to be closer to $1B and will have far more effect on the rest of Toyota and Lexus as a brand than the 500 LF A's. They have now shown they are capable of competing with anyone and that they can do more than just comfortable luxury.

But feel free to keep talking out of your ass. It's clear you haven't done any actual research on the car.

P.S. I agree that the GT-R is a gamechanger as far as pushing other companies further. But while it puts down some impressive numbers it doesn't get in the same ballpark as most of the exotics. Great car, but not in the same class as the LF A.

Yeah that's it keep sounding like a marketing guy from Lexus trying to rationalize a car thats been in development too long (10 years), that wasn't even given the green light to sell until last year, selling only 500 at an absurdly high price, and isn't a halo car like the Veyron.

As far as the GTR is concerned I completely agree. I love the car but I won't defend it like you're defending the LFA.

[Cdnrockies]

Originally Posted by 997GT3

Yeah that's it keep sounding like a marketing guy from Lexus trying to rationalize a car thats been in development too long (10 years), that wasn't even given the green light to sell until last year, selling only 500 at an absurdly high price, and isn't a halo car like the Veyron.

As far as the GTR is concerned I completely agree. I love the car but I won't defend it like you're defending the LFA.

How can you suggest it's not a halo car?

This car changes everything for Toyota/Lexus. You don't think that this will trickle down throughout both companies? Toyota already has the FT-86 in the works...re-entering the performance game that they have been absent from since the Supra. Lexus already has the F and needs to expand their performance line up. Until they do they can't fully compete with the Germans.