# Lexus LFA review by top gear



## buckybadger (Dec 21, 2008)

Lexus's super car...


----------



## Mk23 (May 12, 2008)

Not... a fan.


----------



## -=Hot|Ice=- (Jan 9, 2008)

It's still a Toyo....Lexus. Great car though, for a first try. The price tag is not worth it.


----------



## Stugots (Jan 1, 2010)

Except it's obscenely overpriced due to tremendous use of carbon fiber, 11 years of development, and lots of not nessarily new technology.


----------



## Newmanium (May 9, 2007)

Nice... but why would you buy over a GT-R? Styling is similarly technical, not much of a performance boost. At this price level, you have tons of insane choices, you can buy a whole garage of exotics for the price.


----------



## BerfsBimmer (Aug 25, 2007)

Newmanium said:


> Nice... but why would you buy over a GT-R? Styling is similarly technical, not much of a performance boost.


+1...and that money would buy four GT-R's.
Also, Nissan has many years of experience under their belt with the Evo and Skyline.


----------



## EnterTheDragon (Sep 7, 2009)

Regarding pricing, I've heard numbers ranging from $375k and up. The video said 340,000 pounds which is $550k USD. IMO it won't sell well if it's priced over $150k. It needs to compete with Astons and R8s and Californias not the LP640, Carrera GT, etc. When you're in the 200k+ range, marque matters a lot more than 0-60 numbers, and Lexus does not have the allure or heritage or prestige of names like Ferrari for them to be asking that sum.

If they price it at $375k, I doubt they'd sell more than 100 worldwide. Basically, the insane car collector uber-wealthy would buy it to add to their 60 car collection. But the regular supercar buyers (the people who have only 4 cars and $20 million), will likely pass on it.

The head of Lexus has completely lost his marbles.


----------



## jmsent (Sep 26, 2006)

BerfsBimmer said:


> +1...and that money would buy four GT-R's.
> Also, Nissan has many years of experience under their belt with the Evo and Skyline.


Nissan builds the Evo? On which planet?


----------



## ///MyLittlePony (May 22, 2008)

I don't think Lexus want to sell LFA's, they want to show that they can build a supercar that they can associate with cheaper models for the masses and break into performance car market typically held by German and Italian manufacturers. (i.e. this car has the same brakes as an LFA etc.) I think they lost their footing when they stopped building things like Supra's. The IS-F demonstrated that they could 'mass' produce these cars, but it hardly set the world alight as it was just another Lexus with a bigger engine. BMW can get away with this kind of thing because of the 'mystique' of the M badge and the reputation/legend generated by the 'M' division 30 (?) years ago (guessing)


----------



## cwinter (Feb 3, 2009)

xrated335 said:


> I don't think Lexus want to sell LFA's, they want to show that they can build a supercar that they can associate with cheaper models for the masses and break into performance car market typically held by German and Italian manufacturers. (i.e. this car has the same brakes as an LFA etc.) I think they lost their footing when they stopped building things like Supra's. The IS-F demonstrated that they could 'mass' produce these cars, but it hardly set the world alight as it was just another Lexus with a bigger engine. BMW can get away with this kind of thing because of the 'mystique' of the M badge and the reputation/legend generated by the 'M' division 30 (?) years ago (guessing)


+1, I'll sign off on that.

The LFA is priced so it stands out and it has enough bells and whistles to stand out. Nobody with a sane mind would spend that much money on a Lexus LFA, unless they'd just wanted another car in their garage, and some will want to have another supercar in their garage.


----------



## swartzentruber (Sep 29, 2008)

I'll have to agree with many of the comments above. The projected pricing is insane, and given the high cost, I can't imagine it will do that much for their image, since so few will be sold. Because it was so long in development, many parts are already dated (I've already read comments the transmission is not up to par). It's kind of ugly, and if I really wanted a Japanese supercar, I'd go for the GTR (heck, at that price, you could have 2 of the GTR R models). There's nothing really notable about it, to make it stand out, other than the fact that it's a Lexus, and maybe the extensive use of cf. Any collector who buys one is IMO insane, as I can't imagine it ever being a desired collectors car. I'm sure a new Supra would do a whole lot more for their image than this.


----------



## BlindGoldfish (Apr 27, 2009)

I agree that this car was, as they stated, an engineer's "wet dream." It was basically Toyota's way of spending billions on R/D, which I'm sure they will use, but to have something fun come out of it that will hopefully help boost [create] an image of them providing a sports car.


----------



## EnterTheDragon (Sep 7, 2009)

If they wanted it as a showcase for new technology or bring prestige to the brand, it will take a lot more than a high price tag to do that. Honda tried it with the NSX in 1990, and while the NSX did bring a lot of buzz to Acura/Honda for a couple of years, it quickly waned. After a few years Honda gave up on improving the NSX and it languished. Lexus will need to continually update the LFA to prevent this from happening. Given that these projects are big money-losers, I wonder if Toyota will have the backbone to keep updating a money-losing car every 5 years, especially if the economy remains poor.

Also look at the GTR. After 1 year of hot sales, they are now selling under MSRP. It's really hard to survive in the exotic segment. That's why Bugatti went out of business, same with Aston, and Ferrari and Lambo are owned by larger companies.


----------



## Mk23 (May 12, 2008)

Also, in case no one saw the lap around Top Gear's track it ended up being slower than a Z06 but faster than a Gallardo.


----------



## buckybadger (Dec 21, 2008)

I agree the car is just ridiculously expensive but as an engineering exercise it is an epic achievement for Lexus. Even after working on it for 9 years, they still couldn't showcase and emulate Bugatti. So for Lexus alone this might be great success engineering-wise but when you look at the broad horizon of lunatic-experimental-supercars, the Bugatti is still in a different league :thumbup:


----------



## BlindGoldfish (Apr 27, 2009)

EnterTheDragon said:


> If they wanted it as a showcase for new technology or bring prestige to the brand, it will take a lot more than a high price tag to do that. Honda tried it with the NSX in 1990, and while the NSX did bring a lot of buzz to Acura/Honda for a couple of years, it quickly waned. After a few years Honda gave up on improving the NSX and it languished.


The NSX was regarded as one of the best handling cars, ever. Although it "died," I'm sure honda used a lot of its technology throughout the 90's+ for their vehicles. Now that Toyota has developed what looks to be a lot of new technologies for themselves, they will be able to carry them over into other vehicles w/out having extra R/D costs. Is it the most efficient way to conduct R/D? Probably not, but it also generates some noise for the company.


----------



## mapezzul (Jun 14, 2005)

The LFA was really just a way for Toyota to get into Carbon fiber production and patent weaving techniques (A-pillars). They can also use some of this as positive publicity and some silly people will think their Lexus has some parts shared with a very expensive car (even if it is just the badge).


----------



## NetSpySD (Dec 28, 2007)

Looks like an older Supra.

Lexota.  Toyota needs to stick with family sedans. That is their forte.


----------



## QuoteWarz Insurance (Dec 17, 2009)

I think the LFA is an amazing car, but for the money I would choose a different route. It definitely has a unique look to it and the performance is good as well which is always important.


----------



## Stugots (Jan 1, 2010)

Mk23 said:


> Also, in case no one saw the lap around Top Gear's track it ended up being slower than a Z06 but faster than a Gallardo.


It was also a wet lap, and faster than 95% of the cars on the board, given those conditions.


----------



## getz (Sep 21, 2007)

Mk23 said:


> Also, in case no one saw the lap around Top Gear's track it ended up being slower than a Z06 but faster than a Gallardo.


This was a wet lap, and was 3 seconds faster than the Gallardo (which also wet lapped), faster than the Z06 on a dry track. Not too mention that it was the fastest wet lap in the history of the show. This car is wicked fast, just not 375 grand wicked fast.
-Getz


----------



## getz (Sep 21, 2007)

Stugots said:


> It was also a wet lap, and faster than 95% of the cars on the board, given those conditions.


Doh,
Teach me not to read the whole thread.
-Getz


----------



## BerfsBimmer (Aug 25, 2007)

jmsent said:


> Nissan builds the Evo? On which planet?


Oops sorry, got distracted and carried away when I started thinking about the Skyline.
Well, at least Mitsubishi does make our turbos.


----------



## jusmills (Nov 18, 2005)

BerfsBimmer said:


> +1...and that money would buy four GT-R's.


+2...or a GT-R, a R8 V10 and a decent downpayment on a 458 Italia


----------



## TXSTYLE (Aug 29, 2006)

Nice car but no way EVAR is it worth that money. Hell no!!! 

Give me tried and true Exotic for that $$: Murci or even a Gallardo LP540. The LF-A should be priced under $200k no question. The GT-R will outperform it when they go head to head.... Mark my words!


----------



## Justin T (Oct 10, 2006)

Not to sound like a broken record, but no way for that price.


----------

