RE: Jaguar F-Type Coupe: Driven
Discussion
AstroMonkey said:
Not sure about the F Type but my dad's 07 (I think) XFS was pretty well put together. Lasted about 4-5 years with no real issues, interior held together well, panels never rattled etc.
If that's anything to go by then I'd say there shouldn't be any worries with the F Type.
The 3.0L has been a bit hit or miss. Possibly it's out of the teething stages now, but a lot of XFs with the supercharged 3.0L were in the shop, at least here in the states.If that's anything to go by then I'd say there shouldn't be any worries with the F Type.
Additionally, if you're dropping this kind of coin for a car, I'd also hope you'd be planning to keep it for a lot more than 4 or 5 years. Long-term reliability and maintenance then becomes a real factor. IMS/bore-scoring/D-chunk issues aside with the M96, that's why Porsche (911 in particular, though Boxster/Cayman joining the ranks) has been a long term favorite, as long-term maintenance and running costs are reasonable.
I look at cars like this as something that becomes your avatar. You should be able to drive it for 30 years, because it's still fun and looks great after 30 years (and you can drive it without it breaking down), and you become "that guy that drives that cool car" where you live.
Edited by Goofnik on Sunday 12th January 17:50
Goofnik said:
The 3.0L has been a bit hit or miss. Possibly it's out of the teething stages now, but a lot of XFs with the supercharged 3.0L were in the shop, at least here in the states.
Additionally, if you're dropping this kind of coin for a car, I'd also hope you'd be planning to keep it for a lot more than 4 or 5 years. Long-term reliability and maintenance then becomes a real factor. IMS/bore-scoring/D-chunk issues aside with the M96, that's why Porsche (911 in particular, though Boxster/Cayman joining the ranks) has been a long term favorite, as long-term maintenance and running costs are reasonable.
I look at cars like this as something that becomes your avatar. You should be able to drive it for 30 years, because it's still fun and looks great after 30 years (and you can drive it without it breaking down), and you become "that guy that drives that cool car" where you live.
Most will be purchased on a pcp (finance) deal and handed back after 3 years. Additionally, if you're dropping this kind of coin for a car, I'd also hope you'd be planning to keep it for a lot more than 4 or 5 years. Long-term reliability and maintenance then becomes a real factor. IMS/bore-scoring/D-chunk issues aside with the M96, that's why Porsche (911 in particular, though Boxster/Cayman joining the ranks) has been a long term favorite, as long-term maintenance and running costs are reasonable.
I look at cars like this as something that becomes your avatar. You should be able to drive it for 30 years, because it's still fun and looks great after 30 years (and you can drive it without it breaking down), and you become "that guy that drives that cool car" where you live.
Edited by Goofnik on Sunday 12th January 17:50
And porches engine issues are what scares people away from them as a long term prospect here, long term running costs can be horrific (engine rebuilds)
Goofnik said:
The 3.0L has been a bit hit or miss. Possibly it's out of the teething stages now, but a lot of XFs with the supercharged 3.0L were in the shop, at least here in the states.
Additionally, if you're dropping this kind of coin for a car, I'd also hope you'd be planning to keep it for a lot more than 4 or 5 years. Long-term reliability and maintenance then becomes a real factor. IMS/bore-scoring/D-chunk issues aside with the M96, that's why Porsche (911 in particular, though Boxster/Cayman joining the ranks) has been a long term favorite, as long-term maintenance and running costs are reasonable.
I look at cars like this as something that becomes your avatar. You should be able to drive it for 30 years, because it's still fun and looks great after 30 years (and you can drive it without it breaking down), and you become "that guy that drives that cool car" where you live.
What has the reaction been in the States so far? Jalopnik, Jay Leno and the other usual suspects seem to have a real crush on it.Additionally, if you're dropping this kind of coin for a car, I'd also hope you'd be planning to keep it for a lot more than 4 or 5 years. Long-term reliability and maintenance then becomes a real factor. IMS/bore-scoring/D-chunk issues aside with the M96, that's why Porsche (911 in particular, though Boxster/Cayman joining the ranks) has been a long term favorite, as long-term maintenance and running costs are reasonable.
I look at cars like this as something that becomes your avatar. You should be able to drive it for 30 years, because it's still fun and looks great after 30 years (and you can drive it without it breaking down), and you become "that guy that drives that cool car" where you live.
Edited by Goofnik on Sunday 12th January 17:50
I'd have one in the morning if I could afford it (£102,735.98 for the ideal configuration!)
Edited by Art0ir on Sunday 12th January 18:18
s2000db said:
Spanna said:
s2000db said:
550Bhp and only 4 secs to 62?
Too heavy and or lack of traction??
Only? Too heavy and or lack of traction??
Despite it's absolutely incredible looks, it's an automatic coupe not a supercar baiter. This isn't a competitor for the Nissan GTR or 911 Turbo, though it may steal some sales from those two. The fact that this can hit 60 in 4 seconds whilst looking so beautiful, with a stonking V8 soundtrack and a no doubt heavy auto transmission, loads of gadgets, big heavy comfortable armchair-like electric seats and still comply with all the Euro bulls
t is a brilliant achievement. I hope they sell tens of thousands of them.
What Im trying to say is that if the 0-62, had a 3 in front of it, then it would have opened up an even bigger market for it, anyhow independent testing might even do that for it!
rs mexico said:
Spot on lots of willy wavin going on here.
Or maybe just interested in the engineering challenges involved in making things go as fast a possible and driving the results.loudlashadjuster said:
Maybe...if every potential buyer lived in the land of Top Trumps/school playgrounds.
The limit for super saloons is around 4.5 seconds to 60, traction limited.
Given the weight of the F type (its still no lightweight), a 0-60 time of 4 seconds and 0-100mph of around 8 seconds (same power output and similar weight at the xkr-s) its bloomin brilliant. Much faster than a carrera S once off the line.
You would not drive an ftype R and be wanting for more power. If you want to play top trumps with 0-60, put some stickier tyres on it.
Given the weight of the F type (its still no lightweight), a 0-60 time of 4 seconds and 0-100mph of around 8 seconds (same power output and similar weight at the xkr-s) its bloomin brilliant. Much faster than a carrera S once off the line.
You would not drive an ftype R and be wanting for more power. If you want to play top trumps with 0-60, put some stickier tyres on it.
crosseyedlion said:
The limit for super saloons is around 4.5 seconds to 60, traction limited.
Given the weight of the F type (its still no lightweight), a 0-60 time of 4 seconds and 0-100mph of around 8 seconds (same power output and similar weight at the xkr-s) its bloomin brilliant. Much faster than a carrera S once off the line.
You would not drive an ftype R and be wanting for more power. If you want to play top trumps with 0-60, put some stickier tyres on it.
That reference to the rate of progress after it's got off the line is the most important thing and I'd agree that's definitely a good time.Which just leaves the question is it torque converter losses or traction that stops it getting under 4 seconds to 60.The CTSV certainly seems to be able to get to 60 in ( marginally ) less than 4 on factory tyres so traction doesn't seem to be the limiting factor.Given the weight of the F type (its still no lightweight), a 0-60 time of 4 seconds and 0-100mph of around 8 seconds (same power output and similar weight at the xkr-s) its bloomin brilliant. Much faster than a carrera S once off the line.
You would not drive an ftype R and be wanting for more power. If you want to play top trumps with 0-60, put some stickier tyres on it.
www.cadillac.com/cts-v-luxury-sedan.html
XJ Flyer said:
That reference to the rate of progress after it's got off the line is the most important thing and I'd agree that's definitely a good time.Which just leaves the question is it torque converter losses or traction that stops it getting under 4 seconds to 60.The CTSV certainly seems to be able to get to 60 in ( marginally ) less than 4 on factory tyres so traction doesn't seem to be the limiting factor.
www.cadillac.com/cts-v-luxury-sedan.html
Its traction, trust me. Try putting that much torque to just the rear wheels of anything and it'd be a struggle.www.cadillac.com/cts-v-luxury-sedan.html
MrTappets said:
Pretty sure Motor Trend supposedly got 3.4 out of a v8 S and were so surprised they dyno'd the car. They reckoned that if anything it was making slightly less than the 495 advertised, which certainly bodes well for the R. I mean, how much do the Turbo and Turbo S cost these days
Dynos are notoriously unaccurate thing. Minute changes such as ambient temperature for example can skew the results wildly.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff