[300hp]

So finally after much debate about how the Lexus IS has a superior chassis etc, we now have VIR track times.

335i 3:13.20
IS350 Fsport 3:13.40

However it's important to put things into perspective. VIR has been repaved resulting in better times for the track

http://m.imsa.com/articles/vir-repav...-playing-field

[Maxdog]

Originally Posted by 300hp

So finally after much debate about how the Lexus IS has a superior chassis etc, we now have VIR track times.

335i 3:13.20
IS350 Fsport 3:13.40

However it's important to put things into perspective. VIR has been repaved resulting in better times for the track

http://m.imsa.com/articles/vir-repav...-playing-field

Excellent, I like to know minds faster!!

[Cal]

Thanks for the info. One thing to note is that the 335i has faster acceleration than the IS350, so this in itself could account for the faster lap at VIR. In fact, the results look good for the IS350. If it is only 2 tenths slower than the 335i given that it accelerates slower, it means that the IS350 is doing well around the corners (where brute acceleration is not the main factor). All in all though, good to see the 335i being the faster car overall.

[tturedraider]

Originally Posted by 300hp

So finally after much debate about how the Lexus IS has a superior chassis etc, we now have VIR track times.

335i 3:13.20
IS350 Fsport 3:13.40

However it's important to put things into perspective. VIR has been repaved resulting in better times for the track

http://m.imsa.com/articles/vir-repav...-playing-field

Was the IS tested before the resurfacing and the 335i after?

Did The Stig do both tests?

[Bassthe1st]

The IS350, price and performance wise, should be compared to the 328i, not the 335i.

[tturedraider]

Originally Posted by Bassthe1st

The IS350, price and performance wise, should be compared to the 328i, not the 335i.

Performance position-wise it would be IS250 to 328i.

[Bassthe1st]

Originally Posted by tturedraider

Performance position-wise it would be IS250 to 328i.

Do a little search. you will find that the IS350 has about the same acceleration as the 328i.

[tturedraider]

Originally Posted by Bassthe1st

Do a little search. you will find that the IS350 has about the same acceleration as the 328i.

I'm not talking about how they actually perform. I'm talking about how they're positioned in the market. The IS250 is positioned to compete with the 328i and the IS350 is positioned to compete with the 335i.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Bassthe1st

you will find that the IS350 has about the same acceleration as the 328i.

Which makes the above results at VIR impressive for the IS350. Time-wise, it is barely slower than the faster accelerating 335i around the entire course. This means that it more than holds it's own around the corners, proving that it's handling, agility, braking, etc. are top-notch compared to that of the 335i.

[DrivenByE30]

Its a dead heat for me

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Cal

Which makes the above results at VIR impressive for the IS350. Time-wise, it is barely slower than the faster accelerating 335i around the entire course. This means that it more than holds it's own around the corners, proving that it's handling, agility, braking, etc. are top-notch compared to that of the 335i.

The track was resurfaced for faster times. The is350 time reflects the improvement on the track. The fact that it was beat even given the better surface is more telling than the .2s you are focussing on

[Cal]

Originally Posted by 300hp

The track was resurfaced for faster times. The is350 time reflects the improvement on the track. The fact that it was beat even given the better surface is more telling than the .2s you are focussing on

I see...So the 335i was tested prior to the resurfacing? If so, then I agree with you as well. Both cars should be tested after the resurfacing (or both prior to resurfacing), then those times compared to give a better comparison.

On the other hand, if the 328i really accelerates about the same as the IS350 as mentioned earlier, then comparing both of them at VIR would be more telling about the handling/braking/agility prowness of the F30 chassis and that of the IS. We already know the 335i out-accelerates the IS350 handily, so it is expected to perform better than the IS350.

[BEAR-AvHistory]

Lightning Laps will be published in the October C&D. Hope they are all in it.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by BEAR-AvHistory

Lightning Laps will be published in the October C&D. Hope they are all in it.

See the main page, the times for this year are up there already

[Ali Shiralian]

Originally Posted by Bassthe1st

The IS350, price and performance wise, should be compared to the 328i, not the 335i.

Agreed.

[Babo335]

The IS350 should be on the same market segment as the 328 perforce wise as it does not come close to have the performance of the 335i IMO.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Babo335

The IS350 should be on the same market segment as the 328 perforce wise as it does not come close to have the performance of the 335i IMO.

+1

The whole IS line is not very impressive. Here is the RC-F, the M3/4 competitor.

0/60 4.5
1/4. 12.9@110

Forget about the M3/4 numbers because these numbers are not worthy of being compared to the F80/2. The 335i with the 20hp PPK was tested at

0-60 4/4
1/4 13@105 (extra power shows up in the trap speed, 335i has a trap speed that's significantly lower than the RC-F)

A car that's competing with an M3/4 should post better numbers IMO. I don't think this car will be a track monster either given its weight at 4000 lbs

http://m.motortrend.com/roadtests/co..._f_first_test/

[300hp]

Originally Posted by Bassthe1st

Do a little search. you will find that the IS350 has about the same acceleration as the 328i.

I would go further to say the RC 350 has 320i performance numbers

1/4-mile, mfr. claim (sec. @ mph) 14.3
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 14.7 @ 92.7
0-60 with 1 foot of rollout (sec.) 6.2

http://www.edmunds.com/lexus/rc-350/...est-specs.html

[34.50]

I disagree:
IS250 - 320i
IS350 - 335i
IS-F - M3

Granted the new generation IS-F hasn't been released. When it does get announced/released, it will be pitted directly against the M3.

[Bassthe1st]

Originally Posted by 34.50

I disagree:
IS250 - 320i
IS350 - 335i
IS-F - M3

Granted the new generation IS-F hasn't been released. When it does get announced/released, it will be pitted directly against the M3.

Lexus WANTS to position its lineup like this, but performance wise, that's not what's happening. Understand me, I believe the Lexus is now the better driver's car and I regret not taking a look at the IS350 when I got my car, but the 335i is .7s ahead in the 1/4 and that's too big a differance to pit them against each other. The S4 and 335i are really alone in their cathegory. Then there's the Q50, all alone. Next is the 328i/ATS 3.6/IS350.

[34.50]

Originally Posted by Bassthe1st

Lexus WANTS to position its lineup like this, but performance wise, that's not what's happening. Understand me, I believe the Lexus is now the better driver's car and I regret not taking a look at the IS350 when I got my car, but the 335i is .7s ahead in the 1/4 and that's too big a differance to pit them against each other. The S4 and 335i are really alone in their cathegory. Then there's the Q50, all alone. Next is the 328i/ATS 3.6/IS350.

If all you're comparing is 0-60 & 1/4 mile times. then your logic is valid. However, you shouldn't solely compare two cars based on just those two statistics. The OP pointed out there is a two-tenths of a difference between those cars on VIR, which can be attributed to the driver, pavement, but both times are within margin of error.

[300hp]

Originally Posted by 34.50

If all you're comparing is 0-60 & 1/4 mile times. then your logic is valid. However, you shouldn't solely compare two cars based on just those two statistics. The OP pointed out there is a two-tenths of a difference between those cars on VIR, which can be attributed to the driver, pavement, but both times are within margin of error.

Nope, I have to disagree. What I said was don't bother with the .2s difference. The 335i was tested last year. Then VIR was repaved to make it a faster track. If you look at the main page the M3/4 crowd is discussing how for Vettes, people are posting 2s quicker times relative to last year due to the repaved surfaces. So what is clear is even given the huge advantage of the repaved surface, the IS350 was still beaten by the 335i. The 0.2s is irrelevant as this difference should really be larger had the 335i been tested on the same surface.

I do think people are right when they say the IS350 should be compared with a 328i in respect of performance (not just straight line, even track times like VIR). The 320i is worlds ahead of an IS250, those two aren't even comparable since the 320i is far superior in respect of performance (not just straight line performance). The argument has even been made that the 320i is the best drivers car in the 3 series line up.