RE: Jaguar F-Type versus Porsche 911

[Pesty]

ZesPak said:

I don't own a 911, but if everybody who owned a 2 seater where the two seats are glued to the back of the car, with no space in between, should be able to appreciate this. Laptop/suitcase/coat have to be directed to the boot.

yep the seats are next to useless as seats unless for small kids.

For slinging stuf in the back they are great. especialy if you are scare of opening teh froot in case the cable snaps

[irocfan]

Jag vs 911? IF I were in a position to be able to afford either it wouldn't be the ubiquitous Porsh [sic]. Looks wise it does nothing for me, drove a C4 a few years back and didn't like much about it at all so on that basis I'd be far happier considering the F. Would I choose an F over a 2nd hand AMG or Aston? Now that's a whole other arguement

[abarber]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

have you ever owned a 911? i found the rear seats to be immensely practical.

...

Yup, two full sized suitcases fit on the back seats when folded, without impacting space up front. I dearly miss a 911s practicality.

[Devil2575]

cidered77 said:

whoami said:

Why would you care about rear seats on a 911?

They are pretty much unusable.

What about a GT3?

people do care about them - you can put kids in the back (small kids anyway), which A: is practical, and B: helps with convincing the other half on usually the second biggest ever lifetime purchase. those seats make a huge difference - for me the F type won't even come on the radar because of it. others will be in the same boat.

Indeed.

My uncle had one years ago, the version the predated the 964, precisely because it had back seats so could accomodate his daughter as well.

[em177]

virgilio said:

[benzpassion]

When Hallmark's marketing/PR people at Gaydon get busy pumping out propaganda, like this transparent PR piece, lapped up by the sycophantic, jingoistic British auto hacks, one should always ask what are they trying to hide.

When the vapourware C-X75 supercar project was canned a few months back, JLR's press office put out a cock and bull story about JLR cars being made in the desert, with Saudi aluminium, to divert attention and limit the PR hit.

So what's this F-type PR piece trying to hide? Could it be this:

'Tata Motors Q3 profit falls as Jaguar Land Rover cash boom shifts into reverse'

http://europe.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A...

or this:

'Land Rover scored the worst, with owners of its vehicles reporting problems at more than three times the rate of Lexus. The Dodge brand was the second worst and Mitsubishi third worst. Other poor scorers included Jeep, Volkswagen and Jaguar.'

http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-lex...

- note Jaguar's result for 3 yr old cars means Jaguar has now gone backwards under Tata's ownership, in comparison to the steady progress in reliability and quality made under Ford.

The story of Tata's Jaguar Land Rover over the last 18 months has been the Evoque. JLR's bosses think, hope, pray they can pull the same sh!t - i.e. hype over reality - with the F-type - Lana del Rey substituting for posh spice.

Early pre-order books for the F-type must be looking poor, hence the panicky feeling articles like here, to drum up some mug punters. Couple this to the hype finally falling away from the 18 month old Evoque, with tales of barely 30 mpg fuel economy for the diesel, poor build quality, and the embarrassment of the 'lightweight', '400 kilos saved' 2.7 tonne new Range Rover, and many other setbacks, like the poor XF Euro NCAP rating, and JLR, including the apparently uber successful Land Rover side, suddenly looks very, very shaky.

This is as good as confirmed, without Adrian Hallmark having to confirm in print, by the near 24/7 wall to wall adverts now on all media platforms for 'the sold out' Evoque.

If JLR's marketing people can't swing the obese F-type and obese new Range Rover with enough mugs it could easily be game over for JLR this year.

Edited by benzpassion on Monday 18th February 13:42

[pilchardthecat]

PaulMoor said:

I realy don't get this. Yes, for many people the seats are needed. For many others (i.e. anyone who dose not have 1 or 2 children between the ages of 4 & 14) they are an annoyance that takes away from boot space. If you want the two seats, fine, an F-Type is not for you. Dosn't mean that it's a poor choice for everyone. Many people will like the lack of (for them) pointless rear seats.

You are missing the point, which is that without the seats it can't be a 911 competitor.

The actual usefulness of the seats is irrelevant, since the wife doesn't know how useless they are at the time of purchase but she will notice that they aren't there at all

[pagani1]

No comment-puerile argument!Not much doing on a monday boys?

[GranCab]

em177 said:

virgilio said:

... don't panic it's a photoshoptical illusion .....

[CY88]

virgilio said:

Quote from article: "Jaguar has designed it to be a 911, without the price tag, just like the original E-Type was a bargain alternative to the 911. Can't remember any tears about Jaguar not building a 356 rival then."

Mmh, methinks somebody needs to go back to (car) history books...
E-Type was around way before the 911 (remember all the hype for its 50th two years ago?).
356 was the 911's predecessor, not a smaller model.

F-Type is just obese and pointless.

That picture looks severely distorted / photoshopped. The F-type is indeed wider that an E-type (by 10 inches), but that makes the E look like a pedal car!

Proper E-type derriere

[Chapppers]

Benzpassion, I'm impressed you can type with a chip of that size on your shoulder. There must be some kind of back story to that one?

[RacerMike]

benzpassion said:

Yet more contrived BS

Christ. How many more times are you going to go on and on about JLR!? We get it, you seem to hate them with a passion, but I don't want to have to scroll through another of your BS hate mails every time I look at a post about the F-Type or any other JLR product for that matter. The fact you even feel the need to sneak it in to completely irrelevant topics, like your rantings on the new Corvette thread (about the F-Type again!) means I can't even enjoy reading through anything else on here.

Next you'll be telling me that Adrian Hallmark is part of David Ickes lizard army...

[rajkohli81]

benzpassion said:

and the embarrassment of the 'lightweight', '400 kilos saved' 2.7 tonne new Range Rover

Edited by benzpassion on Monday 18th February 13:42

Have you been living on a different planet to the rest of us?

Have you read/seen any reviews of the new Range Rover or more importantly driven it?

Whether it's lost 420kg or 40kg, it feels immensely improved to drive. I would go so far as to say it's a stunning machine.

Admittedly, bits might fall off, hopefully not as badly as they did on the last one, but every FFRR owner keeps coming back for more. There's obviously something in the products they like.

[RacerMike]

CY88 said:

That picture looks severely distorted / photoshopped. The F-type is indeed wider that an E-type (by 10 inches), but that makes the E look like a pedal car!

That would be because the car in the first picture is a Lotus Elan which is absolutely tiny. So tiny in fact, it's over 100mm narrower than a Caterham Seven at 1,422mm!

[Yell_M3]

splitpin said:

An article true and loyal to the tradition of UK Jounalism (when things are real slow) .............

Something About Absolutely Nothing

what i was thinking...

[f328nvl]

pilchardthecat said:

You are missing the point, which is that without the seats it can't be a 911 competitor.

The actual usefulness of the seats is irrelevant, since the wife doesn't know how useless they are at the time of purchase but she will notice that they aren't there at all

Precisely, and why it won't be a DB9 rival ever, but will be a V8 Vantage rival straight away. The rear seats give you the option to do things that two seats don't, even of you never actually decide to do any of them, which you can't predict with certainty when you write the cheque.

[DJRC]

benzpassion said:

When Hallmark's marketing/PR people at Gaydon get busy pumping out propaganda, like this transparent PR piece, lapped up by the sycophantic, jingoistic British auto hacks, one should always ask what are they trying to hide.

When the vapourware C-X75 supercar project was canned a few months back, JLR's press office put out a cock and bull story about JLR cars being made in the desert, with Saudi aluminium, to divert attention and limit the PR hit.

So what's this F-type PR piece trying to hide? Could it be this:

'Tata Motors Q3 profit falls as Jaguar Land Rover cash boom shifts into reverse'

http://europe.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A...

or this:

'Land Rover scored the worst, with owners of its vehicles reporting problems at more than three times the rate of Lexus. The Dodge brand was the second worst and Mitsubishi third worst. Other poor scorers included Jeep, Volkswagen and Jaguar.'

http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-lex...

- note Jaguar's result for 3 yr old cars means Jaguar has now gone backwards under Tata's ownership, in comparison to the steady progress in reliability and quality made under Ford.

The story of Tata's Jaguar Land Rover over the last 18 months has been the Evoque. JLR's bosses think, hope, pray they can pull the same sh!t - i.e. hype over reality - with the F-type - Lana del Rey substituting for posh spice.

Early pre-order books for the F-type must be looking poor, hence the panicky feeling articles like here, to drum up some mug punters. Couple this to the hype finally falling away from the 18 month old Evoque, with tales of barely 30 mpg fuel economy for the diesel, poor build quality, and the embarrassment of the 'lightweight', '400 kilos saved' 2.7 tonne new Range Rover, and many other setbacks, like the poor XF Euro NCAP rating, and JLR, including the apparently uber successful Land Rover side, suddenly looks very, very shaky.

This is as good as confirmed, without Adrian Hallmark having to confirm in print, by the near 24/7 wall to wall adverts now on all media platforms for 'the sold out' Evoque.

If JLR's marketing people can't swing the obese F-type and obese new Range Rover with enough mugs it could easily be game over for JLR this year.

Edited by benzpassion on Monday 18th February 13:42

Boy...you have issues.

[toppstuff]

benzpassion said:

If JLR's marketing people can't swing the obese F-type and obese new Range Rover with enough mugs it could easily be game over for JLR this year.

Edited by benzpassion on Monday 18th February 13:42

Good lord, that is one of the strangest, skewed, most agenda-driven posts I have seen on PH in recent months.

It also makes no sense. As well being utterly wrong. I am not a JLR product owner, but there is no doubt they are selling more cars then ever and having to hire more people to make them. By any standards, JLR is doing pretty well.

What a strange post. Maybe Mr TATA stole your breakfast and slept with your Mother or something.

[Raitzi]

So..
Boxster S VS F-type base:

+Power
+Looks (well you decide)
+Sound(well you decide)
-performance
-price
-weight
-no DCT or manual
-fuel consumption
-less storage space
-Depreciation(new Jags usually lose value quite fast)

Funny how article says it is only 2.1cm shorter than 911 but 911 still manages to make room for back seats with that +2.1cm

[300bhp/ton]

So how much HP it has decides if it's a 911 or Boxster rival?