RE: New 300hp engine for Jaguar XE, XF and F-Pace
Discussion
Ares said:
But emissions are killing off the 6-pot. So the alternative is sub-200bhp sports saloons, or accepting the mid-market will have to get it's 300bhp from a blown 4-pot. The reality is that it doesn't really change the car.
Very true. Sadly a lot of the emissions benefit is fake in the real world (emissions largely linked to economy), unless you drive a performance petrol engine like a diesel and shift up at ~2,000rpm.You and I seem to keep going around this one. The real-world usage data on the modern 'highly economical' (sic) turbo-petrol engines shows little effective improvement vs their nat-asp forebears, and certainly little vs the few remaining nat-asp competition (e.g. Skyactiv).
So we're having less-enjoyable* engines forced upon us by engineers tasked only with hitting arbitrary, badly-set-out targets. Am I the ONLY one who thinks that's an utter waste of time and resources and a god-awful outcome?
* Unless you like driving engines that give a big slug of power up-front then nothing more afterwards. If you do, great...but such engines already exist - diesel engines - don't remove the choice from the rest of us.
Sub 1600kgs and 50:50 weight distribution and under £40k (thus avoiding that particular tax bombshell) and the XE sounds like an interesting answer to a very current question.
Personally I'd just look at anything you like as long as it's registered before the end of March this year and emits less than 225g/Km.
Personally I'd just look at anything you like as long as it's registered before the end of March this year and emits less than 225g/Km.
DP33 said:
Sub 1600kgs and 50:50 weight distribution and under £40k (thus avoiding that particular tax bombshell) and the XE sounds like an interesting answer to a very current question.
Personally I'd just look at anything you like as long as it's registered before the end of March this year and emits less than 225g/Km.
A higher CO2 car is actually better if registered post April as a second hand buy as long as below £40k from a tax point which I assume is what your on about?Personally I'd just look at anything you like as long as it's registered before the end of March this year and emits less than 225g/Km.
As long as it's less than £40k it will cost £140 a year VED even a big thunderous V8 whereas a 201-225g/km car registered before the end of March would be £290 VED
http://www.parkers.co.uk/car-tax/advice/2016/new-r...
havoc said:
Very true. Sadly a lot of the emissions benefit is fake in the real world (emissions largely linked to economy), unless you drive a performance petrol engine like a diesel and shift up at ~2,000rpm.
You and I seem to keep going around this one. The real-world usage data on the modern 'highly economical' (sic) turbo-petrol engines shows little effective improvement vs their nat-asp forebears, and certainly little vs the few remaining nat-asp competition (e.g. Skyactiv).
So we're having less-enjoyable* engines forced upon us by engineers tasked only with hitting arbitrary, badly-set-out targets. Am I the ONLY one who thinks that's an utter waste of time and resources and a god-awful outcome?
* Unless you like driving engines that give a big slug of power up-front then nothing more afterwards. If you do, great...but such engines already exist - diesel engines - don't remove the choice from the rest of us.
This is true and my current garage proves the point. I have a 2.0 Skyactiv MX5 RF and my wife drives a 1.4 Multiair Turbo Abarth 124. Official numbers favour the 124 but the reality is that the MX5 uses at least 5-10% less fuel in "real world" conditions....not vice versa as the official numbers would have you believe. We've been led down the garden path on turbo charged engines and self-shifting gearboxes because of ill conceived emissions/fuel consumption tests that don't reflect reality and are being routed by manufacturers. You and I seem to keep going around this one. The real-world usage data on the modern 'highly economical' (sic) turbo-petrol engines shows little effective improvement vs their nat-asp forebears, and certainly little vs the few remaining nat-asp competition (e.g. Skyactiv).
So we're having less-enjoyable* engines forced upon us by engineers tasked only with hitting arbitrary, badly-set-out targets. Am I the ONLY one who thinks that's an utter waste of time and resources and a god-awful outcome?
* Unless you like driving engines that give a big slug of power up-front then nothing more afterwards. If you do, great...but such engines already exist - diesel engines - don't remove the choice from the rest of us.
RBH58 said:
. We've been led down the garden path on turbo charged engines and self-shifting gearboxes because of ill conceived emissions/fuel consumption tests that don't reflect reality and are being routed by manufacturers.
Very timely post seeing as there is a time limit approaching for PPI mis-selling (Based upon all the unsolicited calls I get). You may have created job opportunities OP!
But was it really a case of mis-sellng or buyer gullibility?
Mr Tidy said:
Very timely post seeing as there is a time limit approaching for PPI mis-selling (Based upon all the unsolicited calls I get).
You may have created job opportunities OP!
But was it really a case of mis-sellng or buyer gullibility?
The tests are at fault.You may have created job opportunities OP!
But was it really a case of mis-sellng or buyer gullibility?
BTW...I wasn't surprised by the "real world" performance of the two cars. I was expecting it to be the case. All turbo cars seem to somehow get through their emissions/fuel consumption tests without having to spool their turbos up.
Edited by RBH58 on Tuesday 27th June 03:41
havoc said:
Ares said:
But emissions are killing off the 6-pot. So the alternative is sub-200bhp sports saloons, or accepting the mid-market will have to get it's 300bhp from a blown 4-pot. The reality is that it doesn't really change the car.
Very true. Sadly a lot of the emissions benefit is fake in the real world (emissions largely linked to economy), unless you drive a performance petrol engine like a diesel and shift up at ~2,000rpm.You and I seem to keep going around this one. The real-world usage data on the modern 'highly economical' (sic) turbo-petrol engines shows little effective improvement vs their nat-asp forebears, and certainly little vs the few remaining nat-asp competition (e.g. Skyactiv).
So we're having less-enjoyable* engines forced upon us by engineers tasked only with hitting arbitrary, badly-set-out targets. Am I the ONLY one who thinks that's an utter waste of time and resources and a god-awful outcome?
* Unless you like driving engines that give a big slug of power up-front then nothing more afterwards. If you do, great...but such engines already exist - diesel engines - don't remove the choice from the rest of us.
Slightly disconnected thought...if considering a 340i versus one of these then discounts and finance "bungs" probably ought to be factored in. BMW just seem to be trying to give the things away and RRP prices are just fantasy. I got 23% off a 440i without even trying (so fully expect 340i to be similar or even better)and with finance it was even cheaper again. I don't think (I don't knwo so please advise if I am wrong) that Jag are trying that hard with incentives on anything yet? With that in mind the comparison between a creamy six cylinder or a blown four pot might be a touch more challenging
tadaah said:
Slightly disconnected thought...if considering a 340i versus one of these then discounts and finance "bungs" probably ought to be factored in. BMW just seem to be trying to give the things away and RRP prices are just fantasy. I got 23% off a 440i without even trying (so fully expect 340i to be similar or even better)and with finance it was even cheaper again. I don't think (I don't knwo so please advise if I am wrong) that Jag are trying that hard with incentives on anything yet? With that in mind the comparison between a creamy six cylinder or a blown four pot might be a touch more challenging
Including finance deposit contributions you can get between 15-20% off an XE via the likes of Carwow easily. Same for the XF.F-Paces/Types are walking out the door, so little discount on them, but Jaguar are trying very hard to shift the saloons through discounting. And that info is from the dealer I'm buying off.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff