RE: (Not) driven: Jaguar F-Type

[951TSE]

It would be nice if they could find some way of moving that front numberplate as a pure open 'mouth' a la E-Type would in my opinion look so much better, but I guess a stick on across the front of the bonnet is a no no?

[deltashad]

turbobungle said:

Think I prefer the sound of the V6. Just a shame there's unlikely to be a manual option, cars just don't sound right changing up a gear with an auto/double-clutch 'box! And price should be more like Boxter/Cayman, it's too expensive.

I'm with this, the noise is spoilt. Also, I don't find it sexy or interesting. The Porsche is a much better looking car, and a hell of a lot cheaper.

I'm disappointed.

[Carl_Docklands]

Ian_UK1 said:

On a related issue - it was stated many times earlier in this thread that the F-Type must be a Boxster competitor, not a 991 competitor, as it only has 2 seats. That argument simply doesn't hold water - it would make the AMG SL Merc an overpriced Boxster competitor too, when it clearly isn't.

Its a fairly subtle difference.

AMG SL Merc, 991, R8, XK-R, Aston V8V = GT

Boxster, Cayman, F-Type, Lotus = Sports Car

[HighwayStar]

andybu said:

To pick up on the points re F-type pricing vs a vis the Porsche product line.

If I recall correctly the Autocar interview with the Jaguar team brought out the information that Jaguar expect to sell 10,000 XK and F-types per year. That's a global total for the two product lines. 10K a year? - that's it...

Which either suggests that Jaguar management knows that they are starting a fair way behind Porsche in terms of brand strength, market presence, etc, or, the global market for 2 seat sports cars and GT's is much smaller than I had thought..

No wonder the pricing is so steep if they have to pull back the R&D costs across that small a sales volume. I think it'll be a halo car, but it's never going to replicate 911 sales volumes. And it would be unrealistic to expect it to.

The market for 2 seaters is smaller than you thought.
Check out the link below, go to the end and note the Boxster/Cayman sales Jan-Sept '12. Also check out what there real big seller/cash cow is, just how many Cayenne's they shift.
http://skiddmark.com/2012/12/porsches-2012-sales-r...

[EdM]

DaveEssex said:

EdM said:

Jag had an opportunity here to make a great car for the enthusiast pricing it sensibly ...instead they're greedy f***kers asking far too much money and once the novelty value wears off they'll depreciate like a stone...lessons in how to alienate your customer base...

What amazes me most is that so many think Jaguar and Porsche care a sh.t about what we in the little UK think. You can bet that in China and probably the States, where the big markets are, pricing will be such that customers will be hard pushed to chose on value. They don't wear the same rose-tinted glasses and have the same biased love of all things Porsche.
Some of you need to wake up and smell the big World out there.

some of you need to smell the big world out there...? really..??? well out in my big world I have paid the right money for my cars unashamedly favouring Porsche..and on resale none of my cars have dropped in value like a second hand Jag however pretty and sought after at launch...reminds me of the Evoque - style over substance and all that depreciation to go...they got the pricing wrong plain and simple.

[HighwayStar]

EdM said:

some of you need to smell the big world out there...? really..??? well out in my big world I have paid the right money for my cars unashamedly favouring Porsche..and on resale none of my cars have dropped in value like a second hand Jag however pretty and sought after at launch...reminds me of the Evoque - style over substance and all that depreciation to go...they got the pricing wrong plain and simple.

So, would you be assuming that all that extra above the Cayman is pure profit i.e. that they are similar costs to produce and build? I certainly doubt it and that's the real problem for Jaguar. They can't hope to charge Boxster prices and make money.

Edited by HighwayStar on Tuesday 5th February 21:45

[EdM]

HighwayStar said:

So, would you be assuming that all that extra above the Cayman is pure profit i.e. that they are similar costs to produce and build? I certainly doubt it and that's the real problem for Jaguar. They can't hope to charge Boxster prices and make money.

Edited by HighwayStar on Tuesday 5th February 21:45

they got the pricing wrong plain and simple.

[EdM]

maybe I'll be proved wrong ...they'll sell loads at their ambitious pricing and unlike the boxter they maintain sky high residuals...but bet they won't be as much fun as Porsches either...

[Wills2]

Ian_UK1 said:

On a related issue - it was stated many times earlier in this thread that the F-Type must be a Boxster competitor, not a 991 competitor, as it only has 2 seats. That argument simply doesn't hold water - it would make the AMG SL Merc an overpriced Boxster competitor too, when it clearly isn't.

It's not about seats.....and the road you took that down is tortured to say the least.

[andyps]

Carl_Docklands said:

Ian_UK1 said:

On a related issue - it was stated many times earlier in this thread that the F-Type must be a Boxster competitor, not a 991 competitor, as it only has 2 seats. That argument simply doesn't hold water - it would make the AMG SL Merc an overpriced Boxster competitor too, when it clearly isn't.

Its a fairly subtle difference.

AMG SL Merc, 991, R8, XK-R, Aston V8V = GT

Boxster, Cayman, F-Type, Lotus = Sports Car

I agree with Ian, the number of seats is not the relevant factor in terms of pricing and the SL makes an interesting comparison.

Carl - not sure I can agree with the categories you have there, how do you define a GT as opposed to a sports car, what are the characteristics you put for each?

[DJRC]

Wills2 said:

andyps said:

Wills2 said:

Krikkit said:

Wills2 said:

And this isn't a rival for the 911 turbo S! It's a boxster/cayman rival no matter what Jaguars PR machine says and it should be cheaper than it is.

Is it not possible for cars to not really be rivals anymore? Just because Porsche makes a set of cars in a certain range doesn't mean everyone else has to line up their ranges.

This is a competitor for an entry-level 911 whichever way you cut it, but only for price. Practicality is different between the two of them, but how many people actually use all the seats in a 911? I've never seen one with >2 people in it.

I really don't see it that way, I might be wrong but I doubt the market will see it that way either, this isn't a break through "new segment car" like the Espace or X5 were this is a 2 seater sports car (a market that is very small) with one dominant player and that is Porsche.

You don't need to put people in the rear seats of a 911 for them to give you added practicality either it's extra storage and room for stuff which makes the car appealing with the added bonus of being able to carry passengers.

The 911 is lighter/faster more efficent more technically adavanced and has a pedigree in this sector that none can match (whether you like it or not)

Jaguar will want all the comparision tests done against the 911 and probably the R8 the British press will accomodate that request out of loyality etc....but it's a Cayman/Boxster rival priced too high.

I know this sounds very negative but I like the car and the thought of British jobs etc....but at the current pricing I won't be looking at it.

When the last great sports car Jaguar produced went on sale it wasn't just the speed and beauty that shocked everyone it was also the price. (in a good way)

I can't follow your logic here. You are discussing the number of seats/space which is pretty meaningless. For the money of any of the cars discussed you can get a five seater if space is the real priority. I am not sure what you mean by technically advanced but the Jag is pretty much on a par with a Porsche as far as I can see. I am not sure of the weight of the F-Type but seem to remember it isn't as light as the aluminium body would lead you to think. People talk about the pedigree of the 911 but it is a car which has been around a long time and for many years survived despite a fundamentally flawed basic configuration, not because of it

But look at engine size and power, a big part of the make up of cars like this, and I am not sure how the F-Type, with a base spec of a 3.0 supercharged V6 with 340hp and a range topping 5.0 supercharged V8 with 495hp compares to a Boxster with a 2.7 boxer6 with 265hp rather than a 911 with a 3.4 boxer6 and 350hp. Certainly makes the F-Type look like more of a 911 rival to me.

I didn't bring up the rear seats Krikitt did I merely answered his observation, the 911 is about 100-150kg lighter than the F-type IIRC (Boxster and Cayman even lighter still) that to me tends to suggest it's more advanced in its construction.

That is before we start with emissions and engine efficency and they do matter even when people spend 65-85k.

I think they are trying to tempt the boxster/cayman s buyers with the 3.0V6/S and the 911 C2S buyer with the V8? Time will tell.

Looks a great car but I really do think the pricing is wrong (but heh what do I know)

The R8 only has 2 seats. And is mid engined. That is a 911 rival and not Cayman. Your logic falls down.
As far as I can see these take aim squarely at a 911S.

[monamimate]

DJRC said:

Wills2 said:

andyps said:

Wills2 said:

Krikkit said:

Wills2 said:

And this isn't a rival for the 911 turbo S! It's a boxster/cayman rival no matter what Jaguars PR machine says and it should be cheaper than it is.

Is it not possible for cars to not really be rivals anymore? Just because Porsche makes a set of cars in a certain range doesn't mean everyone else has to line up their ranges.

This is a competitor for an entry-level 911 whichever way you cut it, but only for price. Practicality is different between the two of them, but how many people actually use all the seats in a 911? I've never seen one with >2 people in it.

I really don't see it that way, I might be wrong but I doubt the market will see it that way either, this isn't a break through "new segment car" like the Espace or X5 were this is a 2 seater sports car (a market that is very small) with one dominant player and that is Porsche.

You don't need to put people in the rear seats of a 911 for them to give you added practicality either it's extra storage and room for stuff which makes the car appealing with the added bonus of being able to carry passengers.

The 911 is lighter/faster more efficent more technically adavanced and has a pedigree in this sector that none can match (whether you like it or not)

Jaguar will want all the comparision tests done against the 911 and probably the R8 the British press will accomodate that request out of loyality etc....but it's a Cayman/Boxster rival priced too high.

I know this sounds very negative but I like the car and the thought of British jobs etc....but at the current pricing I won't be looking at it.

When the last great sports car Jaguar produced went on sale it wasn't just the speed and beauty that shocked everyone it was also the price. (in a good way)

I can't follow your logic here. You are discussing the number of seats/space which is pretty meaningless. For the money of any of the cars discussed you can get a five seater if space is the real priority. I am not sure what you mean by technically advanced but the Jag is pretty much on a par with a Porsche as far as I can see. I am not sure of the weight of the F-Type but seem to remember it isn't as light as the aluminium body would lead you to think. People talk about the pedigree of the 911 but it is a car which has been around a long time and for many years survived despite a fundamentally flawed basic configuration, not because of it

But look at engine size and power, a big part of the make up of cars like this, and I am not sure how the F-Type, with a base spec of a 3.0 supercharged V6 with 340hp and a range topping 5.0 supercharged V8 with 495hp compares to a Boxster with a 2.7 boxer6 with 265hp rather than a 911 with a 3.4 boxer6 and 350hp. Certainly makes the F-Type look like more of a 911 rival to me.

I didn't bring up the rear seats Krikitt did I merely answered his observation, the 911 is about 100-150kg lighter than the F-type IIRC (Boxster and Cayman even lighter still) that to me tends to suggest it's more advanced in its construction.

That is before we start with emissions and engine efficency and they do matter even when people spend 65-85k.

I think they are trying to tempt the boxster/cayman s buyers with the 3.0V6/S and the 911 C2S buyer with the V8? Time will tell.

Looks a great car but I really do think the pricing is wrong (but heh what do I know)

The R8 only has 2 seats. And is mid engined. That is a 911 rival and not Cayman. Your logic falls down.
As far as I can see these take aim squarely at a 911S.

He repeatedly points out that he is NOT using the number of seats as a criterion... So HIS logic seems fine to me.

[Wills2]

DJRC said:

Wills2 said:

andyps said:

Wills2 said:

Krikkit said:

Wills2 said:

And this isn't a rival for the 911 turbo S! It's a boxster/cayman rival no matter what Jaguars PR machine says and it should be cheaper than it is.

Is it not possible for cars to not really be rivals anymore? Just because Porsche makes a set of cars in a certain range doesn't mean everyone else has to line up their ranges.

This is a competitor for an entry-level 911 whichever way you cut it, but only for price. Practicality is different between the two of them, but how many people actually use all the seats in a 911? I've never seen one with >2 people in it.

I really don't see it that way, I might be wrong but I doubt the market will see it that way either, this isn't a break through "new segment car" like the Espace or X5 were this is a 2 seater sports car (a market that is very small) with one dominant player and that is Porsche.

You don't need to put people in the rear seats of a 911 for them to give you added practicality either it's extra storage and room for stuff which makes the car appealing with the added bonus of being able to carry passengers.

The 911 is lighter/faster more efficent more technically adavanced and has a pedigree in this sector that none can match (whether you like it or not)

Jaguar will want all the comparision tests done against the 911 and probably the R8 the British press will accomodate that request out of loyality etc....but it's a Cayman/Boxster rival priced too high.

I know this sounds very negative but I like the car and the thought of British jobs etc....but at the current pricing I won't be looking at it.

When the last great sports car Jaguar produced went on sale it wasn't just the speed and beauty that shocked everyone it was also the price. (in a good way)

I can't follow your logic here. You are discussing the number of seats/space which is pretty meaningless. For the money of any of the cars discussed you can get a five seater if space is the real priority. I am not sure what you mean by technically advanced but the Jag is pretty much on a par with a Porsche as far as I can see. I am not sure of the weight of the F-Type but seem to remember it isn't as light as the aluminium body would lead you to think. People talk about the pedigree of the 911 but it is a car which has been around a long time and for many years survived despite a fundamentally flawed basic configuration, not because of it

But look at engine size and power, a big part of the make up of cars like this, and I am not sure how the F-Type, with a base spec of a 3.0 supercharged V6 with 340hp and a range topping 5.0 supercharged V8 with 495hp compares to a Boxster with a 2.7 boxer6 with 265hp rather than a 911 with a 3.4 boxer6 and 350hp. Certainly makes the F-Type look like more of a 911 rival to me.

I didn't bring up the rear seats Krikitt did I merely answered his observation, the 911 is about 100-150kg lighter than the F-type IIRC (Boxster and Cayman even lighter still) that to me tends to suggest it's more advanced in its construction.

That is before we start with emissions and engine efficency and they do matter even when people spend 65-85k.

I think they are trying to tempt the boxster/cayman s buyers with the 3.0V6/S and the 911 C2S buyer with the V8? Time will tell.

Looks a great car but I really do think the pricing is wrong (but heh what do I know)

The R8 only has 2 seats. And is mid engined. That is a 911 rival and not Cayman. Your logic falls down.
As far as I can see these take aim squarely at a 911S.

It's not about seats! (I went OT when I answered krikitt)

For me it's about brand perception, performance on all counts and looks and to me looking at those the F-type is a boxster/cayman rival with the V8 nudging into the vanilla 911 sector.

They can't all take aim at the 911s where is the logic in that argument?

[Ian_UK1]

Carl_Docklands said:

Its a fairly subtle difference.

AMG SL Merc, 991, R8, XK-R, Aston V8V = GT

Boxster, Cayman, F-Type, Lotus = Sports Car

Porsche would never agree with you that the 991 is a GT, not a sports car. Personally I think you're right though - compared to the 997 it's gone a long way down that route.

I also think the F-Type, as launched, is part-GT, just like the 991 (whatever Jag might want you to believe). Its weight and its torque-converter-only transmission put it firmly outside hardcore sports car territory. It really does stack-up well as a 991 Cabrio 3.4 competitor, even if the 2 differ in their configuration and the design choices used in their execution.

On paper the V6S Jag may have 2 (half-sized) seats less, yes. But otherwise, from a showroom perspective, it has IMHO far better looks (911 cabrios have always looked odd) more power, more torque, sounds infinitely better, is new and exciting (as it's Jag's return to 'sports cars') is the successor to the E-Type (however flimsy the connection) is 'British' (well 'not German') is better specced (as standard) has almost identical on-paper performance and costs slightly less before options.

Not the world's most difficult sell I wouldn't have thought! (Remember most buyers won't be hardcore car enthusiasts to whom the last couple of 10ths in acceleration or the finest nuances of steering feel will be important).

Ian

Edited by Ian_UK1 on Wednesday 6th February 14:55

[Timbola]

Muuuuuuuuhhhhhh!

Most handsome car I've laid these here eyes on in a looooooooooooooooooooooong time.

Can't remember the last time I've actually, truly, totally wanted a car.

Will wait to spend the money I don't have on a coupé when it comes out and depreciates by a year or 3.

~

Also, wondering why Jag didn't just do a retractable tin-top, á la Merc SL or new BMW Z4? Too heavy?

That'd raise this thing to absolute motoring perfection, for me.

99% tin-top up normal coupé, 1% down roadster for those rare summers-day B-road blasts, with the wind whistling through the hair I no longer have.

[pSyCoSiS]

That is one sensational car.

Dare I say, better-looking than the Alfa 8C ?!

[iSore]

I don't like it. Well, it's alright but I wouldn't cross the road to ogle.

It looks like a combination of many things including a hint of Nissan Z but original it isn't. There's not much that's pretty or graceful about it. It's another overstyled, powerful and (very) expensive sports car that will blend in with all the others. I'm sure there will soon be compelling lease deals on them however.

[zebedee]

Timbola said:

99% tin-top up normal coupé, 1% down roadster

You would be banned from owning an Elise if the Elise forum police saw that was your intention!

[DJRC]

I would love to know how the 490hp V8S is just nibbling into the vanilla 911 sphere...

There are some barmy comments on here.

[tony wright]

EdM said:

...reminds me of the Evoque - style over substance and all that depreciation to go...they got the pricing wrong plain and simple.

Not sure your correct on the depreciation of the Evoque. If the F types has similar residuals, there will be a lot of very, very happy F-type owners.