Lexus LFA lap time at Top Gear Track

Never realized how good of a time this was, considering it was wet and this is still the fastest wet Top Gear lap today, so about 4-5 seconds quicker on a dry lap?

Seeing how much the stig loved driving this car, I'd think he'd do some magic with it around a proper dry track.

Agreed, Wet times on average are a 4s difference, Very wet is 6, Damp is 2 1/2, It also depends on drivetrain. And Bhp and weight can comein to play too, Tyre compound also, So this would be round a 1:18.4s at the TG track if not into the 1:17s like the Zonda.

It sucks that they never tested the LFA in dry conditions. Not to mention the LFA nurb edition.

...Captain Obvious Right There....-_-

You guys realize that a damp or moist track is WORSE to go fast in right? If you use wet tires, it burns them up, if you use dry tires you have no traction. It's a lot easier to go fast in conditions that are one sided. Also, having part of the track dry versus wet also makes it difficult to know how the car will react corner to corner.

whoah that time is out of its chain 1:22s omg for moist/wet it would lap it atleast a 1:18s if its warm and dry.

Well for 350k if i were rich i buy it no question ask. Doesn't matter if it was a little slower its still damn fast. But I think toyota's choosing the buyers. Not just that people think its over price but it really isn't, only 500 will be produced and not just that if you have one you have one of 500. Thats like saying, "I own a lexus lfa do you?"

Weather may make any car faster on any day. Heat, cold, etc

it was no very wet lap no matter what Hamster said.. I guess we all have eyes and see there is a big different between a realy very wet lap shown from the NSX-R Powerlap and the mildely moist lap of the LF-A
As bumrush claimed befor the LF-a is possible up to 4seconds quicker in a perfect condition lap(I guess more realistic are ~3s)..but no way it could lap the track 6s quicker, that would be quicker than a Apollo thats impossible for the LF-A

probably the hammerhead was the only moist part of the track.. after the lap Hammond said that it was a very wet lap. well not all parts of the track i guess.. so less 3-4s? Dang! A dry lap time is needed urgent!

I have seen the test the lap was NOT very wet... the NSX-R lap was very wet the LF-a lap was slightly wet..

thats a very wet lap (NSX-R with tonns of spray from the tires standing water all around the track)
http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNjY2OTUzNDA=.html

thats a mildly moist lap (LF-A next to no spray from the tires mostly moist tarmac and Clarckson said a moist Hammerhead!!!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yv5yoAkDlGc

I've seen the episode and Hammond said it was a very wet lap. I might be mistaking though...

I also have not seen that episode, but a VERY wet lap, like the Alfa 8C, is 8s of a wet lap, a Wet lap, like that of the Viper SRT-10, is comparable to 4s, a wet/damp lap is comparable to 2-3s, a damp lap, is comparable to 1/12s, BUT, this also depends on the tyre size/style/ and drivetrain, for instance, if a car has semi slicks, like a R26R or CSL, it would do much worse than a car with tyes like a ZO6, and a 4wd car will do a Much better time than a rwd and fwd car in the wet, BUT, thats not alwasy the case. but given the Perfromace of the LF-A, i would say in a perfect dry lap, with the Stig Actually pushing it, i would have to guess a 1:18.5, but again, i didnt see the video, so i cnat be sure of my estimates on the lap, since its counted as a wet lap.

the LF-A was not a very wet lap... it was between a damp and wet lap...very wet lap = standing water in every turn which was not the case..

Sir its -6sec difference (very wet). Check wikipedia regarding deductions on weather conditions in a track.

Did you expect anything else? I still wouldnt pay that price though, as great as this car may be, i didnt see the lap, but a normal wet lap is about 4s different than a dry 1.

hey phavyarden

:O!! Thats so DAMN! QUICK!!