RE: New Jaguar F-Type Sport 400
Discussion
Hammerhead said:
Digga said:
XK was basically an XJS in a party frock. The XJS was an old design and not known for its light weight either but, at the same time, would possibly not pass modern crash tests.
Incorrect. The steel X100 XK8 had links back to the XJS, X150 aluminium XK/R did not.Jag and Lexus seem to be in the same mold nowadays with striking looking sports cars but they weigh a ton for some reason. Perhaps they should figure out how to use aluminum like most other manufacturers that sell cars at the prices they are asking for? Would help with their longevity and resistance to rust as well. Carbon fiber isn't required at these price ranges anyway.
cib24 said:
Jag and Lexus seem to be in the same mold nowadays with striking looking sports cars but they weigh a ton for some reason. Perhaps they should figure out how to use aluminum like most other manufacturers that sell cars at the prices they are asking for?
The whole of the Jaguar range is vehicles made principally of aluminium - unlike most other manufacturers.
I find it a curious thing with British cars that elements of the PH massive are so keen to make derogatory comments about the provenance of parts, assemblies, floorpans etc. as if this is done out of penury or paucity of ambition, with the inference that no-one else does it.
A press release about a 'brand new' BMW will be accompanied by only mild cynicism about achievable MPG or VANOS/nikasil/subframe problems on previous models.
The same PR for a JLR product will be accompanied by squawking about how it is saddled with an ancient chassis or somehow a descendant of a Mondeo/XJS/Series III.
Now it may well be that BMW's deeper pockets mean that a substantially larger percentage is 'new' with each iteration, but you can bet your bottom dollar they don't just throw out all the accumulated knowledge and bits that are perfectly fit for purpose and start with a clean sheet of paper every time. We all stand on the shoulders of giants and every time a 'new' BMW 4-cyl diesel is launched (seemingly every 36-48 months) I'm sure there is carry over, commonality and lessons learned from the previous one. It simply wouldn't make sense to chuck away everything every time.
In PH-speak that is 'evolution'. The same from a UK product and it would probably mean 'reliance on creaking old tech'.
Now it may just be that UK products really are the only ones that are this decrepit, or it's just that PH has many members with inside knowledge of the domestic industry informing this kind of comment and over on kolbenkopf.de there is an equal amount of snark about the products from Ingolstadt and Stuttgart, but it's always struck me as odd.
</rant>
A press release about a 'brand new' BMW will be accompanied by only mild cynicism about achievable MPG or VANOS/nikasil/subframe problems on previous models.
The same PR for a JLR product will be accompanied by squawking about how it is saddled with an ancient chassis or somehow a descendant of a Mondeo/XJS/Series III.
Now it may well be that BMW's deeper pockets mean that a substantially larger percentage is 'new' with each iteration, but you can bet your bottom dollar they don't just throw out all the accumulated knowledge and bits that are perfectly fit for purpose and start with a clean sheet of paper every time. We all stand on the shoulders of giants and every time a 'new' BMW 4-cyl diesel is launched (seemingly every 36-48 months) I'm sure there is carry over, commonality and lessons learned from the previous one. It simply wouldn't make sense to chuck away everything every time.
In PH-speak that is 'evolution'. The same from a UK product and it would probably mean 'reliance on creaking old tech'.
Now it may just be that UK products really are the only ones that are this decrepit, or it's just that PH has many members with inside knowledge of the domestic industry informing this kind of comment and over on kolbenkopf.de there is an equal amount of snark about the products from Ingolstadt and Stuttgart, but it's always struck me as odd.
</rant>
cib24 said:
Wow, and they are still that heavy? Ok, didn't know they were already using aluminum in most of the range. I knew the XE was aluminum but thought the older platforms were still steel. I wonder where all the weight comes from then.
'That heavy' ? I dont understand the context of your question. F-Pace is lightest in class (given the feature they carry), Ive understood XE to be a lighter body to allow more engineering underneath?Hammerhead said:
havoc said:
That would have required some real engineering investment, rather than developing it on the cheap out of big brother's floorpan and big brother's engine block...
Weird that the F-type is actually heavier than the larger, plusher XK it borrowed from.JonnyVTEC said:
'That heavy' ? I dont understand the context of your question. F-Pace is lightest in class (given the feature they carry), Ive understood XE to be a lighter body to allow more engineering underneath?
Sorry, I was referring to the F-Type being so heavy despite being all aluminum. I own a 2016 V6S and TBH I don't care what it weighs. It drives, corners, accelerates and brakes like a dream. I think quite a lot of the blabberings about it being "lardy" or overweight come from people who have never driven one. Like the saying "age is just a number", similar could be said about F-types.
d that I am) a sporty Jag should have a six cylinder sound track.
Preselectorquadrant said:
I own a 2016 V6S and TBH I don't care what it weighs. It drives, corners, accelerates and brakes like a dream. I think quite a lot of the blabberings about it being "lardy" or overweight come from people who have never driven one. Like the saying "age is just a number", similar could be said about F-types.
Weight is always the enemy of agility. Imagine how much better it would be if it were 300kgs lighter. Porsche seem to manage 1400kg cars. Why can't Jaguar? What is Jaguar Ali made from? Neutron stars?Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff