WhichCar
Powered by
  • WheelsWheels
  • MOTORMOTOR
  • 4X4 Australia4X4 Australia
  • Street MachineStreet Machine
  • Trade Unique CarsTrade Unique Cars

BMW M4 vs Lexus RC F vs Jaguar F-Type Coupé V6 S

By David Morley | Photos Cristian Brunelli, 23 May 2016 Features

BMW M4 vs Lexus RC F vs Jaguar F-Type Coupé V6 S

Three different takes on the sports coupe question, but which answers it best?

See, it’s some kind of wonder that the sports coupé hasn’t, over the years, been honed by successive trends to arrive at a homogenous design that all manufacturers strive to attain.

But when you line these three up, it’s clear that this has never happened. They look different from each other, they’re all powered differently and each one has different strengths and weaknesses. Yet they’re all vying for the same dollar. Clearly, here is proof of the concept that money buys you choices. Either way, there’s a lot to take in here.

Take, for instance, the BMW M4. The hottest 4-Series has been given what BMW calls a life-cycle impulse. That’s facelift to you and me. The big change has been to slice thousands out of the price to avoid the M4 and the new M5 Pure getting their feet tangled on the dance floor. With a 317kW twin-turbo straight six and a seven-speed DCT, the M4 represents a modern approach with that in-line engine as a nod to its past. And the new $149,900 price tag will attract attention.

BMW M4 vs Lexus RC F vs Jaguar F-Type Coupé V6 S rearsThe Lexus is, despite the brand being all about cutting edge, kind of the old-school hot rod in this company. An atmo 5.0-litre V8 and 351kW tells the story, but so does its kerb weight of 1860kg (claimed). A downsized New Ager it is not. But the $133,110 sticker price is the lowest here and puts the Lexus further into context.

And then there’s the wild card of sorts – the Jaguar F-Type Coupe V6 S. With a supercharged V6 good for 280kW, it’s a few rungs down the horsepower ladder in this trio, and its $151,380 ask – before you add any fruit – doesn’t do it any favours either. It’s also the only one here that is not the top-flight version of its breed, with the supercharged V8 F-Type R casting a big shadow over the V6. Hmm…

While the F-Type might draw on the E-Type for external inspiration, inside it’s a different story. But if it isn’t ye olde worlde drawing room stuff, it’s still nicely executed with everything pretty much where you'd expect it. The electric park brake grates (for me, anyway) and in some ways is even worse than the foot-operated example in the Lexus. Only the BMW gets it right with a conventional hand brake.

Jaguar F-Type Coupe V6 SThanks to the manual gearbox fitted to our test car, the Jaguar is a bit of a one-button job when it comes to selecting the appropriate driving mode. You press the button to sharpen the throttle and open the exhaust and leave it at that for the most part.

The BMW is, in contrast, vastly more complicated. There are three small buttons by the gear selector for the choosing the throttle rate, damper firmness and steering weight. Then there’s another button nearby that controls shift aggression, and all have three settings to choose from.

And then you have a pair of M buttons on the steering wheel, both of which can be configured through the on-board menu system to make a one-touch version of all those other buttons. Seems like doubling up a bit to me, but anyway.

BMW M4The Lexus is somewhere between the other two with a rotary switch on the centre console for moving between comfort and sporty modes. It’s all still a bit fiddly, though, but when you’ve finally dialled everything including the active rear diff up to ‘Kill’, you get a little ‘Expert’ message on the dash. Nice. But mostly unwarranted. Beyond that, the Lexus interior looks and feels a bit overdone to me. Sure, the BMW’s

fake carbonfibre trim is equally naff, but at least the M4's dashboard looks like it was designed in one go. Not so the RC F’s layout, which is more all over the place with different levels and sticky-outy bits for no apparent reason.

The Lexus does, however, have the pick of the chairs with great support and comfort (and they even look good). Not that the others are less than comfy, but the RC F’s seemed to fit me better although the rest of the cabin is a bit tight on headroom with the sunroof fitted.

Lexus RC FAnd you will be twisting around a bit when reversing because the Lexus has a pretty limited view to the rear. The F-Type is even worse with the same restricted rear three-quarter view and an even more limited view out through that slanted rear glass. About the only thing the rear-view mirror shows a bloke my height is the roof lining.

And let’s not forget that the F-Type is the only strictly two-seater here, although the Lexus rear pew is going to be used for soft luggage more often than not. It's a shame the Jag can’t pull this trick off because luggage space in the Jaguar’s hatch is tiny. Pack light, lovers.

All of which makes the BMW the logical, practical alternative here. Not only is luggage space good, the rear seat is actually useable. It’s a four-seater in the real world, not just in the brochure. Add the fact that the more upright glasshouse makes for a far better view in every direction and you have yourself a sensible sportster. It’s even easier to get in and out of.

BMW M4 driving frontAt the drag strip, a very clear pecking order emerges quick smart. In fact, in about 12.57 seconds, because that’s how long it takes the M4 to blaze its way down the quarter mile. It’s doing 188.8km/h through the traps, too, and gets to 100 in a very handy 4.62 seconds.

Those turbos make it very mid-rangey, and from 80-120km/h takes just 2.37sec. And it’s worth remembering that those numbers were all done without the use of BMW’s launch-control.

Why? Because it’s rubbish, that’s why. Oh, the M4 is not alone in that boat – plenty of other big-power rear-drivers have useless launch systems – but the BeeEm's is up there with the silliest of them. Even using the cruise control buttons to lower the launch revs makes no difference: The tyres unhook almost immediately and the engine boings into the limiter and sits there.

Lexus RC F driving topSo the quickest times were recorded with nothing more than a human’s in-built launch control and the second quickest times were done with the traction control switched on. Hope BMW hasn’t added too much to the price for launch control.

The Lexus was next quickest and a good chunk back with a 13.25sec at 177.8km/h and a 0-100 time of just a tenth over five seconds neat. It also managed to get from 80 to 120km/h in under three seconds. What was a bit surprising was how consistent it was with the traction control turned off. Okay, so it’s an auto, but it ran 13.2, 13.2 and 13.2, time and time again. And when you consider how damn heavy the Lexus is (plenty, trust us) that’s even more impressive.

Based on the kilowatts the Jaguar gives away to the other two, it’s no surprise that it was slower. But the manual gearbox also plays against it on the dragstrip, both in terms of consistency and outright ability, as well as dictating that there’s no launch-control system in the manual F-Type.

Jaguar f-type rearOur best of 13.64sec isn’t exactly hanging around, but that was its absolute best and a poor launch or a duff shift or two can easily blow things out into the 14-second bracket. That 13.64 gave us a 0-100 time of 5.42sec, a terminal velocity of 170.25km/h and an 80-120km/h time of 3.7sec. So, while it trails the Lexus by a bit and the BMW by a lot more, it’s still not what you’d call a slow car. Not by any means.

But it wasn’t entirely convincing as a bomb-proof proposition with the clutch feeling like it was suffering a bit. Fast shifts on the strip felt like it had the engine either bogging slightly as you dumped the clutch, but it could also have been the clutch getting hot and bothered and not engaging solidly, allowing the driveline to take a small breather between gears.

What’s also interesting is that away from the hotmix and Christmas tree, the Jag doesn’t feel like it’s giving that much away. Oh sure, it’s never as feisty as the others on the road, but it has plenty up its sleeve for overtaking and hauling along in a tall gear at a moderate speed. Thanks to the fact that a supercharger is on the job from idle, the Jag builds power fairly linearly and simply piles on more as you get higher on the tacho face.

Three cars lined upThe Lexus is different because it needs a few revs up before it’s really hauling. Like all good atmo lumps, the V8 has a distinct two-stage feel and in the RC F that step-up occurs at about 3500rpm and lasts until about 7000. Within that zone, there’s grunt aplenty, but below that the Lexus is still flexible, but doesn’t ripple the tarmac to the same extent. It sure as hell gets your pulse going as the tacho needle sweeps past 3500rpm, though, the note deepening as the V8 starts to really winch in the horizon.

And the BMW? Well, there’s just nowhere on the tacho to hide. The boost builds quickly and from ridiculously low engine speeds to absolutely cannon you out of corners. That turbo rush also gives the BMW an urgency and potency that the others can’t get near. But where the M4 falls down is in the refinement department. Okay, so performance is clearly king in a car like this, but should it be at the expense of so much smoothness?

I’m not entirely sure what’s going on here, but it could be that BMW has tried to engineer some character into the M4’s 3.0-litre straight six. Problem is, it ain’t a smooth, sophisticated character; it has more of a rough-arsed feel that reminds me of the grumpy old pushrod sixes of my yoof.

BMW M4 rearDoes BMW’s habit of playing part of the soundtrack through the stereo system have something to do with all this? Dunno, but I do know it doesn’t feel like a traditional BMW in-line six. And I’ve driven enough of these now to know that this is not an isolated case; this is how they all feel.

That lack of finesse extends to the chassis and steering, too. The adjustability of the steering affects only the weight, but none of the available settings feel quite right. It’s probably nicest in Comfort as the Sport and Sport Plus settings simply make it more difficult to budge off-centre without actually adding to the accuracy.

Speaking of accuracy, it’s actually pretty good, but it just doesn’t want to talk you much about it. The ride is firm, no question, but left in Comfort mode you will actually get used to it after a short time.

Lexus RC F drivingIt never feels quite right, though, and the small-amplitude, small-deflection stuff worries it a bit. Mid-corner bumps are the worst. A particular crater on our drive loop had the BMW’s front end using up just about all its travel, while the same hole sent the Lexus’ front-left crashing into the bump stop.

The pay-off there is that the Lexus rides a little better but it still has pretty dead steering feedback. That said, it is probably almost as accurate as the BMW’s tiller. The big downfall is in its transmission, which feels a bit lazy and unpredictable in some situations while the BMW’s DCT is sharp, intelligent and never throws up any surprises in terms of ratio choice.

Being a manual, if the Jag wrong-slots you, it’s your own fault, but it’s worth saying that the shift action is very good and the engine is flexible enough that you can pull sixth at 80km/h happily and without stressing the car. If anything, the steering is just as lethargic at the straight ahead as the others but thanks to the lighter engine, it feels a little better balanced at speed.

Jaguar F type drivingIf you ask me, I’d say it has a little less spring and a little more travel than the others because when it came to that test-loop crater, the Jag just floated over it. I even did it a second time to make sure I hadn’t missed it first time through. Despite its short wheelbase, the F-Type is the best riding car of this lot and probably the best suited to local road conditions. Never saw that coming, did you?

The Lexus RC F is a competent, swift and well-made car but neither finishes first on a cerebral level nor on an emotional one. And that has to mean it only gets to stand on the third step of the podium.

If you approach this with your head, the BMW is an easy winner. It’s faster, grippier, has better brakes and is somehow, despite all that, vastly more practical than the other two. Hell, it’s even better value when you look at the kit it carries.

Jaguar in the middleBut for me personally, I’d be driving away in the Jag. Limited space? Relative lack of oomph? Couldn’t give a monkey’s to be honest. It’s just big enough, is fast enough in isolation and it just moves me. In particular, that exhaust note has got to be among the best around and it’s the comfiest of the bunch. And that stuff about the V6 being the poor relation to the V8 F-Type? As Tony Soprano once said: "Fugg-edaboudit".

  LEXUS RC F JAGUAR F-TYPE COUPE V6 S BMW M4
Body 2-door, 4-seat coupé 2-door, 2-seat coupé 2-door, 4-seat coupé
Drive rear-wheel rear-wheel rear-wheel
Engine 4969cc V8, DOHC, 32v 2995cc V6, DOHC, 24v, supercharged 2979cc inline-6, DOHC, 24v, twin-turbo
Bore/stroke 94.0 x 89.5mm 84.9 x 89.0mm 89.6 x 84.0mm
Compression 12.3:1 10.5:1 10.2:1
Power 351kW @ 7100rpm 280kW @ 6500rpm 317kW @ 5500-7300rpm
Torque 530Nm @ 4800-5600rpm 460Nm @ 3500-5000rpm 550Nm @ 1850-5500rpm
Power/weight 189kW/tonne 176kW/tonne 206kW/tonne
Transmission 8-speed automatic 6-speed manual 7-speed dual-clutch
Weight 1860kg 1594kg 1537kg
Suspension(F) double A-arms, adaptive dampers, anti-roll bar A-arms, coil springs, dampers, anti-roll bar struts, A-arms, adaptive dampers, anti-roll bar
Suspension(R) multi-links, adaptive dampers, anti-roll bar A-arms, coil springs, dampers, anti-roll bar multi-links, adaptive dampers, anti-roll bar
L/W/H 4705/1845/1390mm 4470/2042/1923mm 4671/1870/1383mm
Wheelbase 2730mm 2622mm 2812mm
Tracks 1555/1560mm (f/r) 1597/1649mm (f/r) 1579/1603mm (f/r)
Steering electrically-assisted rack-and-pinion electrically-assisted rack-and-pinion electrically-assisted rack-and-pinion
Brakes(F) 380mm ventilated discs, 6-piston calipers 380mm ventilated discs, 2-piston calipers 380mm ventilated discs, 2-piston calipers
Brakes(R) 345mm ventilated discs, 4-piston calipers 325mm ventilated discs, single-piston calipers 370mm ventilated/drilled discs, 2-piston calipers
Wheels 19.0 x 9.0-inch, 19.0 x 10.0-inch (f/r) 20.0 x 9.0-inch,  20.0 x 10.5-inch (f/r) 19.0 x 9.0-inch (f/r); 19.0 x 10.0-inch
Tyre Sizes 255/35 ZR19 92Y (f); 275/35 ZR19(r)

255/35 ZR20 97Y (f); 295/30 ZR20 1011Y (r)

255/35 ZR19 92Y (f); 275/35 ZR19 100Y XL(r)

Tyre Michelin Pilot Super Sports

Pirelli P Zero 

Michelin Pilot Super Sport

Price as tested $133,110  $162,900 $151,740
Pros Great atmo V8; great seats; polished dynamics Sublime exhaust note; looks; handling balance Huge performance; seating for four; price cut
Cons Overly complex; much too heavy; dead steering Not that quick; impractical; expensive w/options Overly complex; not hugely enjoyable to drive
Star Rating 3.5/5 4/5 4/5