RE: Jaguar F-Type: the inside story
Discussion
jagfan2 said:
Get ready to get reasonably lusty, though sub 1400kg is a little hopeful considering the boxster only just scrapes this, and this is more 911 sized which is more like 1500kg+ with decent kit, and nothing else in the class gets close to this.
Assume you (and everyone else on here)have driven a recent 8spd auto with a good petrol motor in a light enough car, performance is 90% of a top end DSG now, admitedly not the same feel as a manual, but offers lots of benefits too. Like it or not the manual is dying quickly, both due to emmissions regs and customer demand.
Off topic of the Jag and onto the joys of 3 pedals a little.......Assume you (and everyone else on here)have driven a recent 8spd auto with a good petrol motor in a light enough car, performance is 90% of a top end DSG now, admitedly not the same feel as a manual, but offers lots of benefits too. Like it or not the manual is dying quickly, both due to emmissions regs and customer demand.
I totally understand why autos (all 2 pedal varietie) are eventually going to render 3 pedals obsolete, I will never be able to drive a modern manual car as fast or efficiently as its 2 pedal alternative - but I dont care! I am not racing requiring the extra 0.2 seconds per lap, and I do not care too much for mpg, else I would buy a little diesel run around. Its a cliche, but its true, no 2 pedal car can give the driver the same physical or emotive involvement in gear changing that a manual can, simple as. As long as cars exists with proper manual boxes or when I become too old to be bothered, I will stick with the 3 pedal option, this is something I applaud Porsche for onctinuing to offer on all its performance cars (for now anyway).
mph said:
cragswinter said:
55 grand? 55? About the same number as the age of the perma-tanned old dorris that'll end up driving them.
Can't beat a bit of stereotyping on a monday morning, especially coming from a Z4 driving hairdresser.
but seriously i know it's not the first time it's been mentioned in the thread but £55k? i was merely hoping for a british, stylish, cheaper alternative to the boxster. perhaps not quite so cheap as the e85/86 Z4 but somewhere around there.a car realisticly starting at around £35k which when fully optioned up with the best engine is knocking on the doors of £45-50k isn't to hard to aim for is it?
the copy in the article mentions a 911 altenative, isn't that was the xk is for? or am i missing that this is the xk replacement?
the benchmark always has & always will be the boxster, imho jag need to undercut it on price to get the none perma-tanned 55 year old dorris' buying them.
cragswinter said:
mph said:
cragswinter said:
55 grand? 55? About the same number as the age of the perma-tanned old dorris that'll end up driving them.
Can't beat a bit of stereotyping on a monday morning, especially coming from a Z4 driving hairdresser. but seriously i know it's not the first time it's been mentioned in the thread but £55k? i was merely hoping for a british, stylish, cheaper alternative to the boxster. perhaps not quite so cheap as the e85/86 Z4 but somewhere around there.a car realisticly starting at around £35k which when fully optioned up with the best engine is knocking on the doors of £45-50k isn't to hard to aim for is it?
the copy in the article mentions a 911 altenative, isn't that was the xk is for? or am i missing that this is the xk replacement?
the benchmark always has & always will be the boxster, imho jag need to undercut it on price to get the none perma-tanned 55 year old dorris' buying them.
But I'm also a Porsche fan, so not too one sided.But the one thing I did notice on my XKR is pretty much everything is standard, very few "must have" options - a lot of kit gets thrown at it, which might make the price comparison not quite like for like.
cragswinter said:
indeed you can't but seriously i know it's not the first time it's been mentioned in the thread but £55k? i was merely hoping for a british, stylish, cheaper alternative to the boxster. perhaps not quite so cheap as the e85/86 Z4 but somewhere around there.
a car realisticly starting at around £35k which when fully optioned up with the best engine is knocking on the doors of £45-50k isn't to hard to aim for is it?
the copy in the article mentions a 911 altenative, isn't that was the xk is for? or am i missing that this is the xk replacement?
the benchmark always has & always will be the boxster, imho jag need to undercut it on price to get the none perma-tanned 55 year old dorris' buying them.
I don't see why the F-type has to be an alternative to anything ? The exciting Jaguars of the past pretty much created their own class. I'm thinking of the XK120, E-type, Mk2 and the original XJ6. but seriously i know it's not the first time it's been mentioned in the thread but £55k? i was merely hoping for a british, stylish, cheaper alternative to the boxster. perhaps not quite so cheap as the e85/86 Z4 but somewhere around there.a car realisticly starting at around £35k which when fully optioned up with the best engine is knocking on the doors of £45-50k isn't to hard to aim for is it?
the copy in the article mentions a 911 altenative, isn't that was the xk is for? or am i missing that this is the xk replacement?
the benchmark always has & always will be the boxster, imho jag need to undercut it on price to get the none perma-tanned 55 year old dorris' buying them.
Until quite recently the Porsche 911 was a similar example.
What's the problem if the F-type doesn't align exactly with the Boxster or the 911 or anything else for that matter ?
The idea that all cars have to be fitted into neat groups or classes comes from a combination of political manipulation and lazy motoring journalism IMHO.
mph said:
cragswinter said:
indeed you can't but seriously i know it's not the first time it's been mentioned in the thread but £55k? i was merely hoping for a british, stylish, cheaper alternative to the boxster. perhaps not quite so cheap as the e85/86 Z4 but somewhere around there.
a car realisticly starting at around £35k which when fully optioned up with the best engine is knocking on the doors of £45-50k isn't to hard to aim for is it?
the copy in the article mentions a 911 altenative, isn't that was the xk is for? or am i missing that this is the xk replacement?
the benchmark always has & always will be the boxster, imho jag need to undercut it on price to get the none perma-tanned 55 year old dorris' buying them.
I don't see why the F-type has to be an alternative to anything ? The exciting Jaguars of the past pretty much created their own class. I'm thinking of the XK120, E-type, Mk2 and the original XJ6. but seriously i know it's not the first time it's been mentioned in the thread but £55k? i was merely hoping for a british, stylish, cheaper alternative to the boxster. perhaps not quite so cheap as the e85/86 Z4 but somewhere around there.a car realisticly starting at around £35k which when fully optioned up with the best engine is knocking on the doors of £45-50k isn't to hard to aim for is it?
the copy in the article mentions a 911 altenative, isn't that was the xk is for? or am i missing that this is the xk replacement?
the benchmark always has & always will be the boxster, imho jag need to undercut it on price to get the none perma-tanned 55 year old dorris' buying them.
Until quite recently the Porsche 911 was a similar example.
What's the problem if the F-type doesn't align exactly with the Boxster or the 911 or anything else for that matter ?
The idea that all cars have to be fitted into neat groups or classes comes from a combination of political manipulation and lazy motoring journalism IMHO.
first of all let's put the notion of "jaguars of past" to bed right now, it has no relevence in the same way as comparing the boxster to the 550 spyder.
second of all, why align the f-type to the boxster? because that's it's main competitor. and it's cheaper.
so jaguar are talking about releasing a car that has to be as good as the boxster, well no it has to be much, much better because it's more expensive.
i suspect what they may be thinking is it's a "cut price vantage", but in reality the vantage (& i'm a big fan of them) is trading on it's badge, plus, if the f-type is to steal sales off the vantage, it's hardly a large slice of the pie is it?
the volume sellers in this model are plainly the slk, the Z4 & the boxster. the Z4 & slk do so well because they have easy buy in points for a lot of owners, yes the model you see in evo or on top gear may well be the £50k ///M (yes i'm aware they don't make that version now) or AMG version but the big sellers are the lower down models. it's a pretty simple business model & by ignoring it i can't help feel that jaguar are massively missing a trick.
the jaguar looks to be the most expensive of the lot, so let's just hope it's the best
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I think this is the problem, most people dont understand what goes in these things these days, understand why butActually there isnt, merc make a single wet clutch auto box (not torque converter), where the gears are planets and hydraulic clutches , but thats about it. Most autos use a lock up clutch on the torque converter already (eg direct drive from engine into auto), which removes the 'slush' and allows almost seamless direct shifts. So essentially when moving they are very close to a a DSG in actual shifting performance
Twin clutch boxes use essentially a manual box layshaft layout, so are only one step up from a robotised single clutch manual box really, just with more seamless shifting.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff