Lexus LF-A: The Long and Winding Road

  • Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 794 comments
  • 67,276 views
They do look cool in real life, I saw the bespoilered version at the Cincy concourse.

But they don't look as cool as a Super Decathlon doing a snap roll and landing on the grass strip in your back yard. Or the second one you could afford forte price of an LFA.
 
In person, I think the LFA is one of the best looking cars made in the last 10 year. The details are fantastic and the overall shape is gorgeous.
 
They do look cool in real life, I saw the bespoilered version at the Cincy concourse.

But they don't look as cool as a Super Decathlon doing a snap roll and landing on the grass strip in your back yard. Or the second one you could afford forte price of an LFA.

What's "forte price"? and what's "bespoiliered version" You just making up words to suit your pathetic argument? :lol:

Where's your Super Decathlon going to be hangared or parked? Where's it going to be fueled? Registered? You don't even have a clue. You have a pilot for that plane of yours? I assume you want to fly yourself so you'll be getting a pilot's license. That's at least an easy 2 or 3 thousand, in addition to the costs of buying the plane. Then maintaining it. Then inspection, insurance, etc. Like I said, you make no sense. Your argument is weak and the disdain you have for the car shining through makes you look silly.
 
What a coincidence. Your complete lack of anything resembling a sense of humor when responding to a joking post makes you look silly.
 
Last edited:
But they don't look as cool as a Super Decathlon doing a snap roll and landing on the grass strip in your back yard. Or the second one you could afford forte price of an LFA.

You can do a snap roll on a grass strip, with an LFA. The problem is, you can only do it once.
 
What a coincidence. Your complete lack of anything resembling a sense of humor when responding to a joking post makes you look silly.

Wrong. You yourself are guilty of the very thing you accuse me of. Try again, though. Maybe next time you'll see the humor. But probably not since you just missed it in my previous post. :ouch: Oh, the irony!
 
What's "forte price"?
I mistyped and meant "for the".

and what's "bespoiliered version"
The Nurburgring Edition.

1561.jpg


Where's your Super Decathlon going to be hangared or parked?
Dayton Wright Brothers Airport, KMGY, about 3 miles from my house.

Where's it going to be fueled?
MGY.

Registered?
MGY.

You have a pilot for that plane of yours?
Me.

I assume you want to fly yourself so you'll be getting a pilot's license.
Already have it.

That's at least an easy 2 or 3 thousand
More like 7.

Then maintaining it. Then inspection, insurance, etc.
I'll admit future maintenance and insurance costs are something that need to be factored into the ownership of a plane. Eventually they'll add up to more than you bough the plane for. Figuring that stuff out is part of the buying process.

Like I said, you make no sense. Your argument is weak and the disdain you have for the car shining through makes you look silly.
Thirty minutes ago I got home from a 3 hour instrument flight from Charlotte, NC with a couple buddies. We took a mid-week vacation to see their mom and party at her lake house. We didn't drive because it's almost 8 hours and that is silly.
 
Wrong. You yourself are guilty of the very thing you accuse me of. Try again, though. Maybe next time you'll see the humor. But probably not since you just missed it in my previous post. :ouch: Oh, the irony!

Yes, that's definitely what happened.
 
Yes, that's definitely what happened.

More from the peanut gallery, I see. People assume things and make fools of themselves. If you can't detect sarcasm that's a personal problem.

So, Keef, you know how much those planes go for in good condition? Im no aviation guru, but for the price of an LFA, I doubt the plane comes close. The real bugger is the waterfront property capable of having a boat and plane in its vicinity. I don't see the car covering that, even if it does appreciate in value (which looks unlikely). :sly:
 
Wrong. You yourself are guilty of the very thing you accuse me of. Try again, though. Maybe next time you'll see the humor. But probably not since you just missed it in my previous post. :ouch: Oh, the irony!
Because I was the one who was claiming Keef was "just making up words to suit [his] pathetic argument" because of a typo and a word that Keef didn't make up at all. Because it was clearly always a joke, and in no way just you acting as you are wont to do. Of course. It's so obvious.

More from the peanut gallery, I see. People assume things and make fools of themselves.
For a great example, sometimes people assume that, say, housing prices in Washington are the same as housing prices everywhere else; and make such brilliant comments as "the proposed appreciated value probably wouldn't even cover the price of a house" even though it is fairly easy to get waterfront property (near a light duty landing strip even) in, say, New York for a good bit less than 200 grand.

If you can't detect sarcasm that's a personal problem.

parodyretcon350_1424.png
 
Last edited:
Because I was the one who was claiming Keef was "just making up words to suit [his] pathetic argument" because of a typo and a word that Keef didn't make up at all. Because it was clearly always a joke, and in no way just you acting as you are wont to do. Of course. It's so obvious.
You done assuming? Doesn't look like it. A joke replied with a joke that you didn't get makes my statement... not a joke? :lol: You're a joke.

For a great example, sometimes people assume that, say, housing prices in Washington are the same as housing prices everywhere else; and make such brilliant comments as "the proposed appreciated value probably wouldn't even cover the price of a house" even though it is fairly easy to get waterfront property (near a light duty landing strip even) in, say, New York for a good bit less than 200 grand.
There you go assuming again! You deduced from what in my comment that I was basing property values from "Washington"? You didn't. You guessed, you assumed, and you were wrong. I've lived in 4 states and visited plenty more. And my family is in the real estate industry, so I think I know a thing or two about the price of waterfront property and a house on said property.

Leave your sex-life at home or wherever you 'handle your biz', I don't care to know! :yuck:
 
You done assuming? Doesn't look like it. A joke replied with a joke that you didn't get makes my statement... not a joke? :lol: You're a joke.
Nah, it's still a complete joke. Just not in the why you "intended." And if you want to believe that posting in the exact same manner as you do any other time someone says something you feel the need to "correct", then claiming this one time that you were joking all along and it should have been obvious, counts as having a sense of humor, you are free to do so. I mean, that's what is important, right?



Unless you're making the implication that all of your posts are meant to be jokes and should be treated as such; in which case I seem to be leading the trend.

Leave your sex-life at home or wherever you 'handle your biz', I don't care to know! :yuck:
If the point was in Dallas, you would be looking for it in Beijing. Not that that's any different from usual. Here's some help. Though I don't expect it to actually help.
 
Last edited:
Can't we go back to talking about a very expensive supercar car?
 
You know, the LFA's V10 just might have the least amount of torque from any modern V10 car ever. I just realized that.

Perhaps, but it sounds glorious.

With fast spinning engines, torque is just not going to happen. Look at F1 and the rotary engines of Mazda.
 
The Connaught Type D used a 2.0 Litre V10, but I'm not sure if it ever made it to production.
 
If i remember right the v10 has 90% of its torque from around 3k and it holds it till readline.... at least i think thats what i had read.
 
You know, the LFA's V10 just might have the least amount of torque from any modern V10 car ever. I just realized that.

Well it was geared more so toward the F1 knowledge Toyota had gained. So that explains that. While Italy and America make big liter V10s that don't spin as fast but make monster torque.
 
So this has to be the most expensive drift car.

Sounds like a VK 5.0 from a V8 supercar and from the high revs I'm guessing it is. So why get rid of the V10...?
It uses a V8 from a NASCAR. As for the second part of your quote... I don't know, probably performance limitations?
 
Back