Seen My 1st Isf

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

I saw a White one in Leicester, on the A563 last week.

Boy it looks "tall", not at all squat and wide as I expected it to be. In the pictures, the front wings look like TCC cars, but in reality they look tame. May be the white colour didn't complement it. In fact, it decidedly looked as though it could do with even wider flared arches and more grounding/lowering.

It just looked too much like a normal IS to me and didn't stand out at all. Any one else noticed that?

[Parthiban]

I'm still mixed on the IS-F.........saw one for the first time at the motor show and wasn't impressed at all, didn't find it exciting at all but think it was in the wrong colour (red) and the whole stand seemed quite dull

However, saw it again at the dealers on Friday, this time in black, and it looked really good, I don't mind the fact that it doesn't look too different to the IS, as it's a pretty good looking car in the first place, and it's far more aggressive IMO than the M3 which I struggle to tell the difference between it and the 3 series MSport...........

I must say though that I find the C63 AMG the most exciting appearance wise (but most will probably disagree)

[illestjt]

I find it too much to look at, eyes are directed to too many things. I prefer how Audi go about S4/S6/S8 etc simply styled.

Plus those fake quads!...enough said.

[Parthiban]

Plus those fake quads!...enough said.

They're not fake!

Understand what you're saying though about the design being more fussy than the equivalent Audis but I think they're a tad too understated..............

[TigerFish]

Plus those fake quads!...enough said.

I agree. Fake or not, I still think they look sh%te and is by far the worst part of the car. Two side by side would look fine, the stacked arrangement just unticks all the boxes for me. Horrid.

[Tango]

Plus those fake quads!...enough said.

I agree. Fake or not, I still think they look sh%te and is by far the worst part of the car. Two side by side would look fine, the stacked arrangement just unticks all the boxes for me. Horrid.

They are fake..I've test driven a couple of the production models this year and can vouch for the fact that the quad tips are not connected to anything apart from the rear bumper panel. If they were connected to the exhaust system the rear panel couldn't take the small but constant movement. The ends of the two true exhaust pipes end just before the inner quad pipes, so theres a significant gap between the exhaust and the mainly cosmetic quads (they do allow the gases to exit from behind the bumper panel).

As for the test drives, as I've said before, most of the time you may as well be in a IS250 SE-L, as apart from the seats there's little difference. The only real difference, is when you plant the loud pedal, so sorry Lexus it's not worth the extra £20,000 ....unless I'm going to be taking it to a track every week-end, and then I'd have to be stripping all that excess weight and stuff.....nope, the GTR makes a lot more sense for the money.

[fjcfarrar]

Plus those fake quads!...enough said.

I agree. Fake or not, I still think they look sh%te and is by far the worst part of the car. Two side by side would look fine, the stacked arrangement just unticks all the boxes for me. Horrid.

They are fake..I've test driven a couple of the production models this year and can vouch for the fact that the quad tips are not connected to anything apart from the rear bumper panel. If they were connected to the exhaust system the rear panel couldn't take the small but constant movement. The ends of the two true exhaust pipes end just before the inner quad pipes, so theres a significant gap between the exhaust and the mainly cosmetic quads (they do allow the gases to exit from behind the bumper panel).

As for the test drives, as I've said before, most of the time you may as well be in a IS250 SE-L, as apart from the seats there's little difference. The only real difference, is when you plant the loud pedal, so sorry Lexus it's not worth the extra £20,000 ....unless I'm going to be taking it to a track every week-end, and then I'd have to be stripping all that excess weight and stuff.....nope, the GTR makes a lot more sense for the money.

Lets put the Exhaust thing to bed. the FOUR pipes coming out of the rear silencers poke into the FOUR trims on the rear bumper & and as said are not hard joined because the heat & vibration would wreck the bumper - just like the Lamborghini & for the same reasons. They are not to everyone's taste. They are probably there just to help the rear end look different from the IS250 and the pointless IS350.

The differences that set the ISF apart: The fast 8 speed gearbox is so much better than the IS250 as you would expect from a greatly more matured technology. The ISF ride is much less comfortable than the IS250 on bumpy roads, but the reason for this becomes apparent if you push it - when by comparison the excellent IS250 sways and lurches round corners. ISF brakes - people will probably want to fit these to the IS250 for the solid, fade-free assurance. Then there is the ISF engine. Probably the test drive cars had not done enough miles to loosen up to show their true colours. The extra 250+ BHP and mountains of torque above the IS 250 are pretty obvious.

So, is it worth the extra - probably not. Is the GTR going to be better? Probably yes, even if it is a bit unsubtle in appearance; probably not if you want a powerful 4 door saloon that drives well in any situation - even a traffic jam.

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

Hang on...I'm sure I saw something about there being 2 pipes in total (one each side), with the rear skirt having 4 holes and air between them and the actual pipes...

The new LS looks like that too, with wide slits cut into the rear apron/valance

[Tango]

and the pointless IS350.

Sorry?? What's pointless about the IS350? It's a great car as it has the looks of the second generation IS without the unsightly mods to make it 'look different' or to accomodate the V8 for which the original design didn't take into consideration. It's got useable and more than enough power for the public roads...damn shame it isn't in the UK as that's what I'd be driving instead of the 250...and yes I've driven them in the USA many times.

Probably the test drive cars had not done enough miles to loosen up to show their true colours.

The last IS-F I took for a drive belonged to the dealership manager...it had 12,000 miles on it so I hope it was loose enough.

The extra 250+ BHP and mountains of torque above the IS 250 are pretty obvious.

If you want to be accurate, the 250 has 204 bhp at the fly, and the IS-F has 420 bhp at the fly so do the math, it's 216 bhp more not 250+. Even so it's slightly more than double, but how often are you able to use it in todays traffic...totally pointless. Best compromise in the IS range is the 350...see above comment...306 bhp so still 114 bhp less than the IS-F, but 0-60 mph time of 5.1 seconds compared to the IS-F 0-62 mph time of 4.8 seconds. Hardly worth the effort.

So, is it worth the extra

You obviously think so, but I do not.

[illestjt]

Plus those fake quads!...enough said.

They're not fake!

Understand what you're saying though about the design being more fussy than the equivalent Audis but I think they're a tad too understated..............

I just think the extra design work on the IS-F is just to much, especially that bonnet.

Otherwise the engineering is wicked

[Parthiban]

I'm not entirely sure why the four pipes thing is still going on, I actually poked my head about the one I saw at the dealers to make sure and there are definitely 4 pipes - yes they're not connected to the tips as with most stylised tips attached to the bumpers nowadays (as in Lambos, the R8 and the Veyron to name but a few).

Agree with Tango about the 350 though, was having exactly the same conversation with the dealership that although I'd love the IS-F, it's just too much and unusable on London roads, the IS350 would make so much more sense but unfortunately they won't bring it here (and the recent drop in sales of large engined vehicles is making it even worse)

Also think the interior could be more interesting - in fact if the awesome white leather was available I think that would be enough to make it stand out but in black it all looks too similar...........

Don't agree the GT-R is much better though, the interior is hideous, the dash looks like it's off an 80s American 4x4

Even the exterior isn't particularly exciting, seeing it at the motor show, the 350Z is far better looking car - the only thing the GT-R has is it's mindblowing performance.........although that brings us back to square one about whether it's actually possible to exploit its capabilities on everyday roads...........

[fjcfarrar]

and the pointless IS350.

Sorry?? What's pointless about the IS350? It's a great car as it has the looks of the second generation IS without the unsightly mods to make it 'look different' or to accomodate the V8 for which the original design didn't take into consideration. It's got useable and more than enough power for the public roads...damn shame it isn't in the UK as that's what I'd be driving instead of the 250...and yes I've driven them in the USA many times.

Probably the test drive cars had not done enough miles to loosen up to show their true colours.

The last IS-F I took for a drive belonged to the dealership manager...it had 12,000 miles on it so I hope it was loose enough.

The extra 250+ BHP and mountains of torque above the IS 250 are pretty obvious.

If you want to be accurate, the 250 has 204 bhp at the fly, and the IS-F has 420 bhp at the fly so do the math, it's 216 bhp more not 250+. Even so it's slightly more than double, but how often are you able to use it in todays traffic...totally pointless. Best compromise in the IS range is the 350...see above comment...306 bhp so still 114 bhp less than the IS-F, but 0-60 mph time of 5.1 seconds compared to the IS-F 0-62 mph time of 4.8 seconds. Hardly worth the effort.

So, is it worth the extra

You obviously think so, but I do not.

Sorry about the 250+ BHP - keyslip, should have been 200+. Also reiterate that ISF has 4 pipes & visible tips. Mine is 6 feet away so I think I'm right here. The IS350 seems pointless because the V6 power delivery is not in the same league as the V8, and its fuel economy is scarcely better, and most of all it doesn't have the ISF wonder gearbox which makes it so useable in traffic situations and on the open road. As to styling: I had an ISF 200LE whose styling had poise and presence. When the technically superior IS250 appeared it looked an up-to-date great lumpen pudding by comparison. The ISF is by no means perfect, but makes the best of its dull style origins.

[brick]

and the pointless IS350.

Sorry?? What's pointless about the IS350? It's a great car as it has the looks of the second generation IS without the unsightly mods to make it 'look different' or to accomodate the V8 for which the original design didn't take into consideration. It's got useable and more than enough power for the public roads...damn shame it isn't in the UK as that's what I'd be driving instead of the 250...and yes I've driven them in the USA many times.

Probably the test drive cars had not done enough miles to loosen up to show their true colours.

The last IS-F I took for a drive belonged to the dealership manager...it had 12,000 miles on it so I hope it was loose enough.

The extra 250+ BHP and mountains of torque above the IS 250 are pretty obvious.

If you want to be accurate, the 250 has 204 bhp at the fly, and the IS-F has 420 bhp at the fly so do the math, it's 216 bhp more not 250+. Even so it's slightly more than double, but how often are you able to use it in todays traffic...totally pointless. Best compromise in the IS range is the 350...see above comment...306 bhp so still 114 bhp less than the IS-F, but 0-60 mph time of 5.1 seconds compared to the IS-F 0-62 mph time of 4.8 seconds. Hardly worth the effort.

So, is it worth the extra

You obviously think so, but I do not.

Sorry about the 250+ BHP - keyslip, should have been 200+. Also reiterate that ISF has 4 pipes & visible tips. Mine is 6 feet away so I think I'm right here. The IS350 seems pointless because the V6 power delivery is not in the same league as the V8, and its fuel economy is scarcely better, and most of all it doesn't have the ISF wonder gearbox which makes it so useable in traffic situations and on the open road. As to styling: I had an ISF 200LE whose styling had poise and presence. When the technically superior IS250 appeared it looked an up-to-date great lumpen pudding by comparison. The ISF is by no means perfect, but makes the best of its dull style origins.

Well having read all the recent bits and bobs as an is-f owner I love it, it wouldnt do for us all to feel the same about any motor, the only thing I might say is that you cant drive it to its full potential (just like any car on the roads, ferrari or any other motor come to that. )

[Mincey]

Saw my first one at close quarters this morning (I saw another black one on the road near the Edith Cavel hospital in Peterborough at the weekend)

It looked rather mean in my opinion, but I'm still not sure about the shiny carbon fibre effect stuff around the gear lever.

I did ask if I could have it as a loaner while my IS is serviced next week, but my request was politely refused. Can't think why.

[Paradroid]

Well it was completely unexpected but I saw one in Wigan yesterday. A silver one, very nice indeed :)

I thought it looked great in silver. But personally I'd be happy with a IS250 SR

[wow300]

I seen my first one yesterday and i was not over impressed, didnt look like it does in pics, looks like a normal IS basically, interior nothing special either, this one didn't have leather.

[fjcfarrar]

I seen my first one yesterday and i was not over impressed, didnt look like it does in pics, looks like a normal IS basically, interior nothing special either, this one didn't have leather.

That's probably because what you saw wasn't an ISF because they are only available in one RHD spec which includes leather, an all black interior (including headlining), a shark fin antenna, only 2 rear seats and all the IS250 toys. There are a few IS 250s that have been boyed up to look a bit like the ISF, or it could have been a IS 250SR which is an entry level IS250 with a partial body kit. See the Lexus UK site. PS The other way you could tell is that if it was moving you wouldn't have seen it for long.

[wow300]

Ahh... maybe not then !!

[Looney]

To be absolutely honest with you all, I can't imagine many of you have actually driven the ISF.

I have owned 3 Toyota Avensis, an IS200, an IS220D, RX400h and then an IS250. All good cars (maybe expect the RX which was a luxury but slow people carrying bus) but now as I have bought an ISF I have to say it is an outstanding piece of engineering.

Whether you feel it is not worth the money, think the inch gap between the four outlet pipes and the chrome pipes are too much to bear, let me assure you that there are few cars to match the speed and acceleration of the ISF and even fewer can match the noise and feeling you get driving...even if just at going from 20 to 30 mph in 2nd by planting it and getting that beautiful "marring" for 2 seconds. In addition the acceleration just keeps going and going and going to the point of being very scary and yes, 120 is about as fast as you can go on the roads at 6am on a sunny sunday morning on a straight country road so the 175 has to be kept for the track but that doesn't matter...its how it gets there!

I urge everyone to save your money and get one...absolutely brilliant....so far 2500 miles of great experience...and had to name it "Looney".

The only thing I would change is reduce the radar distance on the cruise control which is too far. Flappy paddles are great, engine is awesome.

The average of 14mpg is ok if you can afford it and if not there is always the snow mode which returns 35-45mpg

As car fans, shouldn't we all celebrsate the fact that Lexus are getting serious and trying to give us a drivers car for the first time....and with the LFA on the potenial list things are only going to get better

[fjcfarrar]

To be absolutely honest with you all, I can't imagine many of you have actually driven the ISF.

The only thing I would change is reduce the radar distance on the cruise control which is too far. Flappy paddles are great, engine is awesome.

The average of 14mpg is ok if you can afford it and if not there is always the snow mode which returns 35-45mpg

As car fans, shouldn't we all celebrsate the fact that Lexus are getting serious and trying to give us a drivers car for the first time....and with the LFA on the potenial list things are only going to get better

I've had mine since April and its still a pleasure every time I drive it. I have no real criticisms but would comment that the all black interior is a bit funeral-parlour. The looks are quite a subtle enhancement of the IS250, but the airflow along the side means that the car gets dirty very quickly. I was thinking of a black one, but glad I didn't because to keep it looking good I would have to spend my time washing it instead of driving it.

RADAR DISTANCE - this is adjustable from the wheel and has 3 settings. The furthest is the default and is chosen to comply with international standards for safe braking distances. The other settings rely on the ISF's better than average brakes. Overall, if you need to reduce the distance you are possibly too close to the car in front to avoid hitting him in poor conditions if an incident ahead happens.

FUEL CONSUMPTION - Will probably reach the mid 20's mpg when it really loosens up for ordinary road driving, although the right foot, sports mode and driving in manual or just having fun can really drag it down well below the 14mpg you are getting. I rarely use the manual mode except for the heck of it because the auto is so very good and makes you lazy.

Hope you continue to enjoy yours as much as I do mine. And thanks to Lexus for filling a niche that I didn't think existed :D

[brick]

I agree with you boys, done 13000 with mine average about 24mpg

[Looney]

firstly congrats on getting one. yet to see another though ...which is good.

I knew someone would tell me the closest cruise setting is ok and closer is dangerous and technically I agree but people in manual cars dart in front in slow conditions.... and although I can stopper quicker than almost everyone, believe me there is no way I am harming a hair (if it had any) on my ISF's bonnet so I do drive safe as needed always ...mind you you'll know the confidence you get when you need to stop. yes can be a tad skittish and it'll spin the expensive shoe leather all to easily in pull off (which has to be done too often in sport's mode to keep the bank manager happy).

There are probably , no in fact certainly (although never experienced one) better, faster, grippier, more stable cars but, for the money, the toys and feeling it gives me - being an ordindary Joe - it's simply awesom.

Have to say too, from a safety point of view nobody, but nobody tail gates you - and that's not because 98% of the time you've blow them into distant dust cloud - but more I suspect, because people see you can ...because of those much talked about 4 pipes i guess - which I have to say make it for me - always wanted 2 pipes and then four ;o)) and then that rumble - which I am told by friends is just as evident from the front and it is from behind...

Honest down sides I've noticed so far are that the interior build quality (the sunroof (which probably needs some more grease) and externally the brakes squeak a little), whilst beautiful to look at does tend to rattle a little more (not to do with speed or abuse you understand) than the IS 220D for example but now after 3 months I finally discovered lexus had already kindly fitted a stereo (but who wants to listen to it when...!!!), but thankfully the ride is actually OK...never in it long enough to notice unless a pot hole jumps out - and that despite what the journo's wrote - and Tiff's anger at the beeps are nowhere in sight.

So when is the ISF Gum-ball run / track day / European mountain climb /...???