RE: Jaguar F-Type V6 S Manual: Driven
Discussion
ewenm said:
I know English isn't your first language but the first line says "A bad Jaguar F-Type doesn't exist". Even the most patriotic Brit would struggle to deny bad Jaguars exist
Curse google translate!!! I must apolijise to everyone on this forum, yes I have made a grave error and jump to conclusion, Matt please take this humblest opinion of being sorry and to any Jaguar fans as it is I who have suffered the head injury!Forgiving the unrepentant is like drawing pictures on water, forgiving the repentant is a step closer to Devine!
kambites said:
fatboy b said:
Absolutely. The V8 & V6 engines have the same package space, as the V6 block is thr same with the two back culinders blanked off.
As I understand it the crankcase is the same, the block is different. One would imagine the mounting position is still the same, though. Hmmm not encouraged by the slipping clutch, hinting at the 'afterthought' nature with which this has obviously been pushed through the engineering department.
I suspect these will be the cars bought by the 10% of drivers who own Jaguars. It'll need to be engineered with a bit more safety factor than 0.8 to avoid angry customers and warranty claims.
I suspect these will be the cars bought by the 10% of drivers who own Jaguars. It'll need to be engineered with a bit more safety factor than 0.8 to avoid angry customers and warranty claims.
WolvesWill said:
Surely not? Sounds an incredibly heavy/wasteful way of doing things?
It's true apparently.http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
There's some pictures on that thread and a lot more threads about it too from a year or so ago when the f-type was launched.
Besides cost savings on only having one casting, powertrain packaging and weight distribution remains the same across all the variants which must make life a bit easier/cheaper.
kambites said:
Smallish production volume engines are never going to be as thoroughly tested as the mainstream four-pots fitted to family hatchbacks and rep mobiles. It's just not commercially viable to do so.
Surely a manufacturer like Porsche, Ferrari and Lamborghini, can afford to develop a car as well as any large manufacturer? I think failures are the parts supplier (or materials supplier to the parts suppliers) fault. Google 'quality fade', etc and you can find out the practices that go on.Also more parts in an engine, or new technology, means parts are usually more likely to fail. Also the more likely an engine is to be used at high revs with a high oil temperature, the more likely parts are to fail.
If you're a small manufacturer that can't afford to fund the development of a competitive, reliable powertrain, you just buy in one from a bigger company.
As I have always said, the move to auto 'powerful cars' is not market or demand driven, it is manufacturer drive as power figures only ever go up / cars get heavier (last 6 months aside)and warranty issues mean a less likely to incure cost transmission is sort, hence the death of the manual.
Niffty951 said:
Hmmm not encouraged by the slipping clutch, hinting at the 'afterthought' nature with which this has obviously been pushed through the engineering department.
I suspect these will be the cars bought by the 10% of drivers who own Jaguars. It'll need to be engineered with a bit more safety factor than 0.8 to avoid angry customers and warranty claims.
It was a well used Pre-Production car wasn't it ? if the clutch slips whilst under warranty (beyond the usual wear and tear criteria) then it goes back and gets fixed, if it dies out of warranty then you spend £800 or so on getting a new one put in, all part of owning a car, if Jaguar get loads back with slipping clutches they would, I assume uprate the part to cope.I suspect these will be the cars bought by the 10% of drivers who own Jaguars. It'll need to be engineered with a bit more safety factor than 0.8 to avoid angry customers and warranty claims.
I do not think it is beyond Jaguar to provide a clutch that lasts and contains the power from the engine without slipping, it isnt like it is new ground, there are clutches out there that contain huge torque.
ILoveMondeo said:
WolvesWill said:
Surely not? Sounds an incredibly heavy/wasteful way of doing things?
It's true apparently.http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
There's some pictures on that thread and a lot more threads about it too from a year or so ago when the f-type was launched.
Besides cost savings on only having one casting, powertrain packaging and weight distribution remains the same across all the variants which must make life a bit easier/cheaper.
Best regards,
MyCC.
MyCC said:
This is also why despite the aluminium construction, the F-Types are still surprisingly heavy. The engines are on the lardy side, which costs them at the scales compared to 911/Cayman.
Best regards,
MyCC.
When people pointed this out on the XE, the engineers made noises about them being able to make the suspension heavier for better handling or something like that. So the XE isn't a featherweight either given the noise thats made about its construction.Best regards,
MyCC.
At the end of the day, the end user isnt going to notice the difference. If they want to save overall weight they could probably save a few KG by going to the gym.
KTF said:
J4CKO said:
if the clutch slips whilst under warranty (beyond the usual wear and tear criteria) then it goes back and gets fixed
Hah, good luck trying to get that past the dealer. They will say 'wear and tear' all day long.I should imagine the folk that buy them are generally intelligent and probably not above litigation, letters to Head Office etc if they feel it is not up to scratch, so I would counter with, good luck to Jaguar if they think they can fob a 10k mile clutch failure as wear and tear without a battle and loss of custom.
I suspect they will just ensure production ones are up to the job and it wont be an issue.
J4CKO said:
So, you go back with your year old Jag F Type and they would claim wear and tear on a clutch thats only done a few thousand miles ?
I should imagine the folk that buy them are generally intelligent and probably not above litigation, letters to Head Office etc if they feel it is not up to scratch, so I would counter with, good luck to Jaguar if they think they can fob a 10k mile clutch failure as wear and tear without a battle and loss of custom.
I suspect they will just ensure production ones are up to the job and it wont be an issue.
Why wouldn't they get away with it? Lamborghini did and they are a lot more expensive than a Jag. Look up e-gear I should imagine the folk that buy them are generally intelligent and probably not above litigation, letters to Head Office etc if they feel it is not up to scratch, so I would counter with, good luck to Jaguar if they think they can fob a 10k mile clutch failure as wear and tear without a battle and loss of custom.
I suspect they will just ensure production ones are up to the job and it wont be an issue.
Happyjap said:
ewenm said:
I know English isn't your first language but the first line says "A bad Jaguar F-Type doesn't exist". Even the most patriotic Brit would struggle to deny bad Jaguars exist
Curse google translate!!! I must apolijise to everyone on this forum, yes I have made a grave error and jump to conclusion, Matt please take this humblest opinion of being sorry and to any Jaguar fans as it is I who have suffered the head injury!Forgiving the unrepentant is like drawing pictures on water, forgiving the repentant is a step closer to Devine!
KTF said:
Autocar made a comment about how the positioning of the gear lever was a bit further back than you would expect due to it not being originally designed for a manual shift.
No mention of this in the test so I guess it is a personal thing?
Hi there,No mention of this in the test so I guess it is a personal thing?
I actually spoke with Rory while on the launch about this and given we're a similar height I was surprised he found it an issue! We'll hope to spend more time with a manual in RHD and deliver a more detailed verdict then. Certainly the location didn't hinder anything but it is perhaps slightly further back than ideal.
Matt
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff