Lexus GS F: V10-powered M5 fighter rumoured

Article
Gallery

By Tim Beissmann | November 23rd, 2011

Lexus is reportedly considering an LFA-inspired high-performance version of its GS large luxury sedan to take on the BMW M5.

UK website Autocar quoted a Lexus insider at last week’s Los Angeles Auto Show who admitted the Japanese manufacturer “would love” to unleash a GS F production car to rival the likes of the M5, Mercedes-Benz’s E63 AMG and Audi’s RS6.

Autocar believes the GS F – if it were to be produced – would be powered by a slightly detuned version of the Lexus LFA supercar’s 4.8-litre V10 engine. It says the GS F’s engine would have a capacity of 4.6 litres and generate around 335kW of power – down from the LFA’s 412kW peak power output.

The new BMW M5 – destined for Australian showrooms in February/March next year – is powered by a 4.4-litre twin-turbocharged V8. The M5 produces exactly the same amount of power as the LFA, but a whopping 200Nm of additional torque.

With the Lexus GS F far from confirmed for production, however, the best bet for Australian Lexus fans in the short term is the GS 350 F Sport (pictured), which arrives in Australia early in the second quarter of 2012 (around April/May).

The GS 350 F Sport gets the standard car’s 3.5-litre V6, good for 233kW and 376Nm, and capable of accelerating from 0-100km/h in 6.0 seconds.

As we reported earlier this month, the GS 350 F Sport variant benefits from the new Lexus Dynamic Handling System with four-wheel steering, Drive Mode Select system with unique ‘Sport Plus’ setting, a revised sports suspension tune and a host of interior and exterior design enhancements.

Official Australian pricing and specification details will be confirmed closer to the launch of the all-new Lexus GS in the second quarter of 2012.

Piston Broke

Lexus need to build a GS F soon, and not in 4 years’ time when the GS is 3/4 of the way through its life cycle. Super charge the IS F engine and it will easily make more than 335 KW de-tuned v10 claim and cost a fraction of the LFAs engine.
DLR1

why not start by dropping the IS-F’s 5.0 litre straight in? It would be a substantial improvement over any other powerplant already in the GS, sure it might not be a true M5 or E63 rival, but could probably hit every market at a much sharper price.

Vince

Add two turbos and I think you are on the right track.

Dan

V10? Noice!!!! No doubt will sound awesome! Hopefully as awesome as the LFA, would be great, I’d love to hear one in real life. Given the numbers, there will be more chances of me hearing the V10 out of the GS, than the LFA.
Hyundai Lover

335kW is already well below the competition, and not that far away from the ISF. Would need at least 373kW to be competitive. And just as BMW moves away from the V10 for the M5, the GSF looks to get one.

Rick

It’s an improvement over what they have got , but it’s still only falcon power at a premium price at least it should be better built

Shak

It would be nice to see the LFA V8 in the mainstream Lexus range, however i doubt they can make it work. Why not jut strap two turbos to the V8 in the ISF and follow the germans.

Dan

The LFA has a V10, not a V8…

Jake Williams

335kW? I’m sure the new M5 has more power than that! Lexus I’m surprised the LFA only has 412kW, especially considering the old RS6 had 426kW. Try harder please!

bert

WHY TRY HARDER? The LFA is all about the complete package not just how big your is!
john

The LFA has a N/A 4.8l V10 for 412kw, the RS6 has a 5.2L twin turbo V10 for 426kw. I think lexus did a good job for a first effort. Torque is way behind of course and the RS6 is in a low state of tune but I think lexus did quite well. As for taking on the M5 with this effort. Lexus stop dreaming!

Snoop

Maybe they don’t need more than 335kw.
It might have less power than the M5 but maybe Lexus have developed a way to counter the lack of power and use the power they have better than the M5.
It’s a very big call on my part comparing with the almighty M5 I know.
Things like this have happened before.
Don’t count it out till they build it.
I’m quite happy to eat my words if it gets whacked by the M5. Hahaha.
Rick

Sounds like a good idea but why not with 412kw
Pur

Germans kind of cheat by using turbo chargers.. I mean anyone can put turbos in their cars..

F1MotoGP

with turbos on you can go down with engine size and you got same or more power. In Germany car companies will pay tax on CO2 that is why they add turbo.

“From 1 July 2009, annual circulation tax to consist of a base tax and a CO2 tax. Rates of base rate will be €2 per 100 cc (petrol and €9.50 per 100 cc (diesel). CO2 tax to be linear at €2 per g/km. Cars with emissions below 120 g/km will be exempt (110 g/km in 2012-1013; 95 g/km after that).”

AndyGF

People forget that not soooo long ago, it was only a select few Audi models that came with turbos, whereas every single japanese manufacturer less Honda, had a host of turbo charged cars…

And those were the days of jamming/overheating wastegates, poor/or no inter-cooling, inferior white metal bearings, poor scroll and wheel designs, horrific NOx/KW ratios, primitive MAF/P sensors leading to a lot of ECU guesswork, just to name a few turbo related problems.

Along came the germans, spent a few billion, and now we have NO wastegates (nothing to jam), variable vanes which virtually eliminate lag, recycling dump-valves which dont dump already cooled air, etc. They are so reliable, they use turbochargers on virtually every model they make…

Dan

Cool story bro… That is interesting, because many years ago I had a twin turbo 1992 Toyota Soarer for a few years. I’ve had no “jamming/overheating wastegates”, intercooling was excellent for a stock system, no “inferior white metal bearings”, the design of the two turbos was good, not much turbo lag and good kick (Supra’s was even better as it was sequential), after adding mods to it, I had no issues with any “ECU guesswork” due to “primitive MAP sensors” as you falsely claim. It was an easy car to tune on a dyno.

For the time, Japanese turbo cars were arguably the most advanced in the world. As far as turbo problems go, the only turbo problems I’ve encountered on my Soarer was when I tried to increase the boost pressure of the turbos from stock 7 psi to a bit over double that for more power. There was a physical limit as to how much air they could pump, due to the air intake turbine being made of ceramic material for weight reduction (quicker spool up), there was a risk it may snap off. I overcame that issue by replacing those turbines into steel wheel ones. I gained more power, albeit there was a tiny bit more lag. Either way this issue was more to do with me modifying the car beyond manufacturer’s specs, and I’d imagine you’d encounter heaps of issues modifying Euro turbos, no doubt!

Either way, your story above is laughbale, given that even now, those 90s Japanese cars are still going strong, and easily kick ass of most late model turbo Euro cars…

AndyGF

As far as you know your ECU did not have any issues, but by todays standards your ECU would have been considered faulty.
“Worlds Most Advanced Turbo” cars in those days all had to run ridiculously rich WOT mixtures 11-12:1, nowhere near the stoich mixtures achieved by modern day turbo charged cars, and there was no doubt, if they had taken the time/money and developed accurate mass airflow sensors (not rocket science lets be honest), they would not have had to do so much ECU guesswork to compensate, they could have made them a lot cleaner, had less oil contamination and would have been more reliable too.

Jamming wastegates were common back then, often intermittent too, causing once-off ‘engine light’ problems that could never be solved by the mechanics, cause a ‘special type’ of person had to drive them to get it jam. The fact you didnt have those problems is a tribute to your sensibility as a driver, not any kind of mechanical advantage. (Kudos!)

If I had a dollar for every time I herd long winded excesses from all the turbo charged ‘bangers’…
Dan

Are you seriously trying to compare the technology in cars from 20-30 years ago against cars of today on an even ground? Haha, why do you even bother? That is a truly pointless comparison mate. Of course an ECU from 20 years ago would be considered as substandard when compared to an ECU manufactured today, Captain Obvious!

And clearly you have no idea about the reasons why stock Japanese sports cars of that day came with that tune… they were all tuned rich for a reason. Nothing to do with your false claim of “inaccurate airflow sensors”… Look up the Gentleman’s Agreement for a start and why all cars were detuned to 206 kW and you’ll understand The rich tune was no obstacle for anyone, most owners easily changed the settings to a leaner and more powerful tune afterwards anyway. They were (and still are) some of the most easily modified vehicles there are.

And no, I am not a sensible driver (whatever that means), I have a heavy foot, the car certainly took a fair bit of hammering. The only time my engine light came on was due to the factory fuel cut restriction, which was a piece of cake to disable…
AndyGF

Thank you for agreeing with me… Turbo charged cars in those days were garbage! Just like I said earlier. ^_^

The mixtures were ridiculously rich because they trying to prevent detonation (ping, knock). Simply put, they added a massive (20%) safety margin for the mixture simply by overfueling the hell out of it, primitive solution to a problem that should never had existed in the 1st place. And the gentlemens agreement (if anything) should have made it easier to get the mixtures right, because the engineers knew what they were working with before they even started. Then the germans decided they were going to trump that lot and engineer the problems OUT, and guess what… They have!

Back on the subject of the original poster, it was the Japs that Hacked/Cheated using turbochargers, not the Germans.
Dude

AndyGF is clearly trolling, nothing else. 1990s turbo charged japanese cars were “rubbish”?!?! I don’t think so! They were over engineered for that matter! For instance Supra’s 2JZ-GTE, or GTR’s RB26 are some of the best engines ever made!

IF they were so “rubbish” as you claim, how is it that it is possible to double or triple their output with not a great deal load of effort. Show me a comparable German car that can safely do this for the same sort of budget as can be done on a Japanese car.

Far out, there’s way too many muppets on this forum.
Dan

Where did I agree with you? You’re deluded mate! Why would they want to prevent engine detonation when every man and his dog who bought one, went off and leaned them out, with no issues!

Besides, what does turbo technology got to do with engine knock… nothing! Your argument sounds like a desperate attempt of clutching at straws. Although I think Dude is more on the money with his comment about you trolling.

Dan

Not all engines are designed for turbos. I woudln’t say it’s cheating, it’s a very efficient and effective replacement for displacement

Snoop

335kw isn’t so bad. Call it Falcon power at a premium price but, this thing will be lighter and be able to put that power to good use through the chassis and drive train.
Lexus do some good things.
This will be a toe in the water for them.
I’m liking Lexus’ moves at the moment.
Donerlich

Jeez there’s a lot of if’s and maybe’s and could be’s on this site.