RE: Jaguar F-Type V6 S: Driven
Discussion
What a lot of contributors to this forum seem to forget is that this is a sports car and is brought by heart rather than head. The comparisons against the 911 and it not having the 2 extra seats, or it being far too expensive compared to a Boxster will be irrelevant to a lot of the people who will buy F-Type. They will buy it as a purely emotional purchase, i.e. because of the way it looks and the noise it makes. Oh and they won't be comparing it spec by spec against the Boxster either because they will have the money and won't care. It's not austerity for everyone in the world.
Regards,
My CC.
Regards,
My CC.
I realise the 911/F type will continue to be compared to death (I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds it a bit tedious) but for some reason I don't understand, the 911 has no appeal to me what-so-ever. I admit I do take a second glance at a GT3, RS or Turbo when I see them, but the standard 911 models just don't grab me at all. Perhaps they are too familiar.
Reading this article, and seeing Steve Sutcliffe's Autocar video it appears Jaguar have built a cracker. That's fantastic news, and as I think I'm prejudiced against the 911, F type all the way for me, thanks.
One other point to make about the price; it isn't just this Jaguar. The Alfa 4C is expected to cost £40,000, and isn't that expected to be just a 1.8 Turbo? Seems they're all getting quite pricey, I think many people have price lists from 10 years ago in mind when they moan about it. A reasonably well specced Mini is £30,000 these days FFS!
The only reason I don't like the price is because I can't afford one.
Reading this article, and seeing Steve Sutcliffe's Autocar video it appears Jaguar have built a cracker. That's fantastic news, and as I think I'm prejudiced against the 911, F type all the way for me, thanks.
One other point to make about the price; it isn't just this Jaguar. The Alfa 4C is expected to cost £40,000, and isn't that expected to be just a 1.8 Turbo? Seems they're all getting quite pricey, I think many people have price lists from 10 years ago in mind when they moan about it. A reasonably well specced Mini is £30,000 these days FFS!
The only reason I don't like the price is because I can't afford one.
MyCC said:
What a lot of contributors to this forum seem to forget is that this is a sports car and is brought by heart rather than head. The comparisons against the 911 and it not having the 2 extra seats, or it being far too expensive compared to a Boxster will be irrelevant to a lot of the people who will buy F-Type. They will buy it as a purely emotional purchase, i.e. because of the way it looks and the noise it makes. Oh and they won't be comparing it spec by spec against the Boxster either because they will have the money and won't care. It's not austerity for everyone in the world.
Regards,
My CC.
Not so sure the F is in that rarified world (aventadors/GTO's/lambos etc...) sub 100k 60-80k hard facts still matter, they did when I bought my 911. Regards,
My CC.
It was an indulgence for me but one that needed to be edged with some real world economics.
E38Ross said:
3304hl said:
pretty enough; but it's about 200 lb. too heavy and with no manual gearbox I'm not there.
200lbs too heavy for what exactly? If it's speed or cornering you mean then you're theory falls short on the Nissan gtr doesn't it. Any expert will share that one of the biggest challenges in making a car 'handle' is weight.
rare6499 said:
Callum?
Yes, you're right. Ian Callum."There are two things you can't change - the law of Brussels and the law of physics," explained Jaguar design director Ian Callum. "Car design is about elegantly wrapping a powertrain. There are details on the F-TYPE which refer to the E-type, but not specifically. It is mainly about line, surface and proportions."
"We did look at giving the F-TYPE an oval grille, but we decided we wanted an expressive change. The grille we came up with was inspired by the original XJ."
The importance of the F-TYPE is that it returns Jaguar to the sports-car market from which it has been absent for far too long. "Sports cars are the heart of our industry," he said.
"With the F-TYPE we've put the driver right at the centre point of the car. We have a long bonnet and short overhangs, or chiselled corners to make the front overhang look shorter, and a tucked-in tail like the E-type."
The result is the lowest, widest and shortest Jaguar ever - built almost entirely of aluminium, but with a composite boot deck and front splitter and some magnesium sections in the front headlamp carriers and cross-car beam. That makes it light. The body alone is 35kg lighter than Jaguar's target figure. The weight of the whole car starts at less than 1,600kg for the entry-level V6.
"The interior architecture is deliberately very simple, with a strong line to give a cockpit feel. It's the driver's office. The switchgear is very tactile, mechanical and technical, and the dials are analogue because that makes them easier to read. And there's no wood. The E-type didn't have any wood in the cabin, either, except on the steering wheel, because that's how things were done in those days."
CAllum said:
...built almost entirely of aluminium, but with a composite boot deck and front splitter and some magnesium sections in the front headlamp carriers and cross-car beam. That makes it light. The body alone is 35kg lighter than Jaguar's target figure. The weight of the whole car starts at less than 1,600kg for the entry-level V6.
Where does the huge weight penalty come from then?so here is a new boxter on pistonheads......
http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/p...
Aspiration: Normally Aspirated
Engine size (Litres): 3.4
Cylinders: 6
Engine power (BHP): 315
Top speed (MPH): 173
Acceleration: 0 to 62 in 5.1 seconds
Price £58,850!!!!
and the entry level F-Type
Engine: 2,995cc, V6, supercharged
Power (hp): 340hp
0-62mph: 5.3sec
Top speed: 161mph (electronically limited)
Price: £58,500
not alot in it performance wise, and they are the same price.
nice cars are expensive i dont beleive jag have got the pricing wrong at all.
as someone else on here said, some people think its 10 years ago pricing wise.
in fact the choice between a new boxter or a completley new to the road car like the F-type for the same money would be so easy if i had £58k to spend.
http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/p...
Aspiration: Normally Aspirated
Engine size (Litres): 3.4
Cylinders: 6
Engine power (BHP): 315
Top speed (MPH): 173
Acceleration: 0 to 62 in 5.1 seconds
Price £58,850!!!!
and the entry level F-Type
Engine: 2,995cc, V6, supercharged
Power (hp): 340hp
0-62mph: 5.3sec
Top speed: 161mph (electronically limited)
Price: £58,500
not alot in it performance wise, and they are the same price.
nice cars are expensive i dont beleive jag have got the pricing wrong at all.
as someone else on here said, some people think its 10 years ago pricing wise.
in fact the choice between a new boxter or a completley new to the road car like the F-type for the same money would be so easy if i had £58k to spend.
What ? A specced up car is more expensive than a base car ? How does that work?.
The only valid comparison is to compare like for like in terms of spec. The 987S is £45K base but I don't how different the base spec is compared to the base F-type.
I am not sure how long the "new to the road" aspect is going to last anyway, not that it makes a car inherently better than one launched a long time ago, like 12 months ago.
The only valid comparison is to compare like for like in terms of spec. The 987S is £45K base but I don't how different the base spec is compared to the base F-type.
I am not sure how long the "new to the road" aspect is going to last anyway, not that it makes a car inherently better than one launched a long time ago, like 12 months ago.
Edited by nickfrog on Thursday 18th April 10:33
I wonder what discounts you will be able to get on the F-type in 6-12 months time?
Currently you can get £17-20K off a brand spanky new XK built to your spec.
That makes it the same price, if not cheaper than an F.
My thoughts are that Jag have priced the F-type so highly so they can:
1) make a killing off the 'early adopters' for 3-6 months
and then
2) Offer discounts of £10-15K which makes it easier to sell against the boxster as you will be getting a 'bargain' of the 'more expensive car' for the same price as the boxster.
Currently you can get £17-20K off a brand spanky new XK built to your spec.
That makes it the same price, if not cheaper than an F.
My thoughts are that Jag have priced the F-type so highly so they can:
1) make a killing off the 'early adopters' for 3-6 months
and then
2) Offer discounts of £10-15K which makes it easier to sell against the boxster as you will be getting a 'bargain' of the 'more expensive car' for the same price as the boxster.
Agoogy said:
CAllum said:
...built almost entirely of aluminium, but with a composite boot deck and front splitter and some magnesium sections in the front headlamp carriers and cross-car beam. That makes it light. The body alone is 35kg lighter than Jaguar's target figure. The weight of the whole car starts at less than 1,600kg for the entry-level V6.
Where does the huge weight penalty come from then?It seems the F-type is 'heavy' in comparison to a Boxster or a 911 but not an Aston Vantage, for example. So, perhaps the penalty is the crash-structure/occupant-protection needed in any front-engined car?
In turn, as soon as Porsche builds a front-engined model - eg, the Panamera - it's mighty heavy compared to... a Jag XJ.
I have posted this in one of the other F-Type discussions in relation to the comparison of the price with a Boxster or 911. As the F-Type is a spiritual successor to the E-Type I would suggest that the 911 is much more of a rival. Had the E-Type evolved over the last 50 years it would surely be much more of a 911 rival than it would be a Boxster rival. In terms of performance and price of either the V6S or the V8 that is surely the case.
I thought the F type coupe prototype pics from a while back were stunning ..... But somehow this hasn't translated into the production convertible.
I "like" it ...... But it doesn't wow me. The rear looks a bit dumpy lower down (rather like the X type) and the grille is just too big.
Oh ..... And nobody seems to have commented on the wheels .... which look like they would be more at home on a midrange Focus.
Might look better in the flesh.
I "like" it ...... But it doesn't wow me. The rear looks a bit dumpy lower down (rather like the X type) and the grille is just too big.
Oh ..... And nobody seems to have commented on the wheels .... which look like they would be more at home on a midrange Focus.
Might look better in the flesh.
andyps said:
I have posted this in one of the other F-Type discussions in relation to the comparison of the price with a Boxster or 911. As the F-Type is a spiritual successor to the E-Type I would suggest that the 911 is much more of a rival. Had the E-Type evolved over the last 50 years it would surely be much more of a 911 rival than it would be a Boxster rival. In terms of performance and price of either the V6S or the V8 that is surely the case.
And as Steve 'all day long' Sutcliffe points out in his Autocar vid, the F-type V8 S's poke is comparable to a 911 Turbo's. And the new Turbo is going to cost c. £110k in basic coupe spec, so more for the convertible, say, c. £120k. All things considered, £80k for the V8 S drophead is pretty fair.
nickfrog said:
What ? A specced up car is more expensive than a base car ? How does that work?.
The only valid comparison is to compare like for like in terms of spec. The 987S is £45K base but I don't how different the base spec is compared to the base F-type.
I am not sure how long the "new to the road" aspect is going to last anyway, not that it makes a car inherently better than one launched a long time ago, like 12 months ago.
ok i'll give you that one it's not quite like for like. The only valid comparison is to compare like for like in terms of spec. The 987S is £45K base but I don't how different the base spec is compared to the base F-type.
I am not sure how long the "new to the road" aspect is going to last anyway, not that it makes a car inherently better than one launched a long time ago, like 12 months ago.
Edited by nickfrog on Thursday 18th April 10:33
I was just trying to make the point that all these lovely sports cars are expensive, and, that the jag does have a crossover with the boxter,in some of these posts people seem to think are cheap as chips.............. i mean 45k for the entry level 'S' is still a chunk of change.
and yes the new model has been out for 12 months, but the boxter as a car brand has been around for over 17 years.
and to declare an interest, if i could afford it i would be happy with either a top end boxter or an entry level f-type.
c7xlg said:
I wonder what discounts you will be able to get on the F-type in 6-12 months time?
Currently you can get £17-20K off a brand spanky new XK built to your spec.
That makes it the same price, if not cheaper than an F.
My thoughts are that Jag have priced the F-type so highly so they can:
1) make a killing off the 'early adopters' for 3-6 months
and then
2) Offer discounts of £10-15K which makes it easier to sell against the boxster as you will be getting a 'bargain' of the 'more expensive car' for the same price as the boxster.
If you're waiting for discounts you could be waiting a very long time. Volume for this car has been quoted at 15,000 units per year; and that's for worldwide distribution, the UK will be very lucky to get 50% of that. I can't see Jag needing to discount to shift 7500 of these things a year, can you?Currently you can get £17-20K off a brand spanky new XK built to your spec.
That makes it the same price, if not cheaper than an F.
My thoughts are that Jag have priced the F-type so highly so they can:
1) make a killing off the 'early adopters' for 3-6 months
and then
2) Offer discounts of £10-15K which makes it easier to sell against the boxster as you will be getting a 'bargain' of the 'more expensive car' for the same price as the boxster.
ooh, my brother-in-law is being given one of these by Jag, fully specced to how he wants it, as a thank-you for letting them borrow a couple of his more rare classic Jags to take to a foreign market for display (China I think?).
I'll have to jump in it when he gets it. I really like the looks.
I'll have to jump in it when he gets it. I really like the looks.
I agree with NGK210 regarding the V8 versus the 911.
The F type sits between the Boxster and the 911 pricewise. Which I think is a good idea and leavespace below for an new snaller vehicle to sit beween an MX5 and boxster, based upon Jag's 3 series rival. I have no problem with Jag creating new sectors, why are some when to what their comptition do?
Also I have not done an exhastive comparision whe you spec a boxster versus and F type. But options will make a difference and it could see a Boxster come close to an F type in price.
Those who say it is old tech I am finding it difficult to understand. The basic Boxster platform and engines have been around far longer than the XK / F type. Also the F type platform is greatly changed from the XK.
The V6 is new. Finally the weight difference between the 911 and F type is very little.
Seems that to some that Jag can never do anything right. Maybe in the past but they are certainly making interesting vehicles and have more in teh pipelin. Personally I would buy if they did not have leather interiors. I do not believe in killing animals for car interiors (leather is not aways a by-product of meat).
The F type sits between the Boxster and the 911 pricewise. Which I think is a good idea and leavespace below for an new snaller vehicle to sit beween an MX5 and boxster, based upon Jag's 3 series rival. I have no problem with Jag creating new sectors, why are some when to what their comptition do?
Also I have not done an exhastive comparision whe you spec a boxster versus and F type. But options will make a difference and it could see a Boxster come close to an F type in price.
Those who say it is old tech I am finding it difficult to understand. The basic Boxster platform and engines have been around far longer than the XK / F type. Also the F type platform is greatly changed from the XK.
The V6 is new. Finally the weight difference between the 911 and F type is very little.
Seems that to some that Jag can never do anything right. Maybe in the past but they are certainly making interesting vehicles and have more in teh pipelin. Personally I would buy if they did not have leather interiors. I do not believe in killing animals for car interiors (leather is not aways a by-product of meat).
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff