RE: Jaguar F-Type 2.0: Review
Discussion
Cars with 4 cylinders and/or Diesel engines are simply not worthy of the Jaguar badge.
Maybe a new brand below Jaguar should be introduced and named after a different wild cat?
I'm all for "Palla's Cat" ( otocolobus manul).
Maybe a new brand below Jaguar should be introduced and named after a different wild cat?
I'm all for "Palla's Cat" ( otocolobus manul).
Edited by florian on Saturday 5th August 11:43
Edited by florian on Saturday 5th August 11:43
florian said:
A Jag should most of all feel special. And most 4 cylinder engines and diesels are exactly the opposite: Plain boring and mediocre.
If they hadn't put the 2.7/3.0 Diesel engine in the XJ then the company would be dead now and the same goes for the 4 cylinder engines in the X-type etc. A v12 doing 10mpg just wouldn't sell these days and it's not like Jaguar hasn't had 4 cylinder engines in its cars before even in the William Lyons era. 99% of companies can't survive on building what they want they have to build what the customer wants. As it's been said so many times above now this car is primarily for export markets where tax on 6+ cylinders is punitive. If they are going to build it for those markets though they may as well sell them everywhere because the few extra £££ they bring in helps them still to build the v8 etc. Exactly the same reason as why Porsche sell more SUVs now that sports cars but at least it keeps the company going so they can still build them.
Robert-nszl1 said:
A lot of people will buy the F Type on looks alone, and in a way why not? But in my view ALL F Types are too expensive, and these are big cars- I saw one sitting next to an XKR in a showroom, and there isn't much in it sizewise, and probably explains the weight.
The reality is that the equivalent priced Porsches are objectively better in pretty much every way, are better built, and won't depreciate as much.
But to a lot of people looks matter....
Are they too expensive though? Here in Germany, Jag is offering serious rebates on new cars and one-year old CPO F-Type Rs are quite a steal. Depreciation is real, for sure...but in the end, these are not sensible purchases and Porsches depreciate just the same, though they start to bottom out slightly a bit earlier. With my previous 997, that lack of depreciation was easily cancelled out by the ridiculous prices OPCs charge for pretty much nothing over here.The reality is that the equivalent priced Porsches are objectively better in pretty much every way, are better built, and won't depreciate as much.
But to a lot of people looks matter....
Let's keep in mind that a run-of-the-mill Carrera or Carrera S doesn't even come with full leather as standard (I believe it DID come standard on UK 997s, don't know if that's still the case, but it certainly isn't in Europe or the US), which is standard throughout the F-Type range as far as I'm aware. I reckon, to option out a new 991 to similar equipment levels and taking into account common rebates, you'd likely be spending 40k € more on the 911 (and yes, a sizeable amount of that cash will evaporate the moment you drive it off the lot, same as for the F-Type). The 911 does weigh less and it is undeniably faster on a track. Thanks to the new turbo engines, a PDK equipped Carrera S even matches or, depending on conditions, can even better an F-Type R from a stop (they're about even from a go with the R obviously having an advantage at higher speeds) - it was a whole different story with the old 991.1, which is a lot slower than the R. But where driving fun is concerned...I don't know. I still love 911s after many years in the Porsche camp, but there's lot to like about the F-Type. Would I enjoy it even more with a manual? Absolutely. That's one thing that's going to get me back to Zuffenhausen before long, but other than that? To me, the R is significantly more fun to drive than my 997 (even manual) ever was. It's much more of an occasion, the sound is obviously fantastic, the power delivery is intoxicating, the car is much more of a handful and much more challenging to drive fast (which can be a good or bad thing, obviously) though I prefer the electric steering in the F-Type to the 991 (neither are on par with the 997's hydraulics, however!) and, let's not forget, it's much, much rarer sight on our continental streets.
Now...as regards build quality...I understand that things have gotten a bit better with the 991 and from my test drives I would agree with that to some extent, but there's still rattles and squeaks here and there, though certainly not as bad as with my 997. My 997 (and I'm not alone in that - I was a regular contributor to a guide on fixing the most egregious of rattles on the German Porsche forums) was an absolute rattle-can. Many people (particularly older owners with poor hearing) might not notice or care about such things, but as an enthusiast who would like to listen to an engine note once in a while, such secondary noise can become quite bothersome. It's the main reason I got rid of it in the end as the OPC never managed to fix all the problems with it and there was a new squeak or rattle almost every other week. It just never feld like a solidly put together car for me. Also: wind noise. This might not be too bad on UK streets, but on the Autobahn: oh my. I rarely took the car over 200 kph because it just became unbearable in conjunction with all the other noise when passing over bumps. Then there's the sweat inducing instability at very high speeds (we call it "tigern" in German) that's inherent in the RWD 911 design. Not too terribly fun, then.
Granted, my 997 was a year older than my R when I got it and the Jag might well fall apart before long, but for the past year (in which I put almost as many miles on it as I had on my 997 in many years!) it's been rock solid and the most fun I've ever had with a car. When it comes down to it: I love all sports cars, particularly Porsches as well, but for the time being, my love affair with the F-Type R lasts and I'm not alone in that either. Most of the owners (of which there are admittedly only rather few here in Germany) are also converts from the Zuffenhausen camp.
Edited by freeman2344 on Saturday 5th August 14:33
Rawwr said:
culpz said:
If that's the case, why not tell him to save an absolute fortune and get himself a bloody Nissan Micra instead!
Because a Micra isn't a Z4.culpz said:
Seriously though, i'd question if he really wants a Z4 in the first place or if it's really the car for him.
"Do you really want a Z4?""Yes."
Maybe all these 4-pot Z4, SLK, TT..etc drivers should be told they're doing it wrong?
florian said:
A Jag should most of all feel special. And most 4 cylinder engines and diesels are exactly the opposite: Plain boring and mediocre. And as far as Mercedes is concerned, can you imagine an AMG GT with 4 cylinders? Why would anybody want that?
The Z4 is a little soft soft-top. Not a high power GT.Ares said:
Rawwr said:
culpz said:
If that's the case, why not tell him to save an absolute fortune and get himself a bloody Nissan Micra instead!
Because a Micra isn't a Z4.culpz said:
Seriously though, i'd question if he really wants a Z4 in the first place or if it's really the car for him.
"Do you really want a Z4?""Yes."
Maybe all these 4-pot Z4, SLK, TT..etc drivers should be told they're doing it wrong?
The E89 Z4 2.0i SDrive variant does 0-60 in 6.9s. Thats a match for a Fiesta ST and a Clio 200 . Thats only 1/2 second shy of a Golf GTIs time and significantly quicker than a GT86.
The older non turbo'd four pot Z4s werent quick but then they're not really about performance, just like an mx5 isnt about performance.
The Jaguar F-Type is not the car it used to in the 1960's it has no class looks like all the rest boring not worth my money. The Corvette is twice the car better performance better looking better handling and in the same price range. This is what happens when you copy the majority! I had a 1960 Jaguar XK 150 it was a beautiful car with class and quality still a classic today. Today even the BMW is boring the same old grill looks like all the rest. What happened to real design? Jack
Jack Allen said:
The Jaguar F-Type is not the car it used to in the 1960's it has no class looks like all the rest boring not worth my money. The Corvette is twice the car better performance better looking better handling and in the same price range. This is what happens when you copy the majority! I had a 1960 Jaguar XK 150 it was a beautiful car with class and quality still a classic today. Today even the BMW is boring the same old grill looks like all the rest. What happened to real design? Jack
1960s F-Type?And not driven the latest Corvette, but I wouldn't have said they would have the same appeal at the bottom of the market? i.e., this (overpriced) £50k 2.0 F-Type?
Jack Allen said:
The Jaguar F-Type is not the car it used to in the 1960's it has no class looks like all the rest boring not worth my money. The Corvette is twice the car better performance better looking better handling and in the same price range. This is what happens when you copy the majority! I had a 1960 Jaguar XK 150 it was a beautiful car with class and quality still a classic today. Today even the BMW is boring the same old grill looks like all the rest. What happened to real design? Jack
300 BHP is that you ?Ares said:
Jack Allen said:
The Jaguar F-Type is not the car it used to in the 1960's it has no class looks like all the rest boring not worth my money. The Corvette is twice the car better performance better looking better handling and in the same price range. This is what happens when you copy the majority! I had a 1960 Jaguar XK 150 it was a beautiful car with class and quality still a classic today. Today even the BMW is boring the same old grill looks like all the rest. What happened to real design? Jack
1960s F-Type?And not driven the latest Corvette, but I wouldn't have said they would have the same appeal at the bottom of the market? i.e., this (overpriced) £50k 2.0 F-Type?
A situation which is softening due to the new Mustang, but the cowboy hat brigade still rule strong....
The Surveyor said:
Ares said:
Jack Allen said:
The Jaguar F-Type is not the car it used to in the 1960's it has no class looks like all the rest boring not worth my money. The Corvette is twice the car better performance better looking better handling and in the same price range. This is what happens when you copy the majority! I had a 1960 Jaguar XK 150 it was a beautiful car with class and quality still a classic today. Today even the BMW is boring the same old grill looks like all the rest. What happened to real design? Jack
1960s F-Type?And not driven the latest Corvette, but I wouldn't have said they would have the same appeal at the bottom of the market? i.e., this (overpriced) £50k 2.0 F-Type?
A situation which is softening due to the new Mustang, but the cowboy hat brigade still rule strong....
Ares said:
Jack Allen said:
The Jaguar F-Type is not the car it used to in the 1960's it has no class looks like all the rest boring not worth my money. The Corvette is twice the car better performance better looking better handling and in the same price range. This is what happens when you copy the majority! I had a 1960 Jaguar XK 150 it was a beautiful car with class and quality still a classic today. Today even the BMW is boring the same old grill looks like all the rest. What happened to real design? Jack
1960s F-Type?And not driven the latest Corvette, but I wouldn't have said they would have the same appeal at the bottom of the market? i.e., this (overpriced) £50k 2.0 F-Type?
Both handle as well as each other.
The Corvette's interior is shocking for the money. It's on par with a basic Fiesta.
I buy an F-Type out of the two. And thank deity Jaguars aren't like they used to be. The company would be dead and buried long ago if that was the case.
Edited by BenjiS on Monday 7th August 20:58
bobmcgod said:
Wasn't there a rumor that they were going to put the V6 Diesel in the XK a while back, something about the 635d selling well?
I worked for JLR at the time. We got as far as having a few XK 3.0D prototypes running around. Having driven one of them, it certainly compared well to the contemporary 635d. However, the V6 diesel is a taller engine than the V8 petrol, due to the 60° vs. 90° cylinder bank angles. This necessitated a 'hump' in the XK's bonnet, something I'd not seen since the 2.0 variants of the R8 Rover 200/400.
Ultimately I heard that what killed it as a proposition is that one of the senior engineers (it may well have been Mike Cross himself) decided that while it compared well to the 635d, it ultimately went against the philosophy of how the XK should be as a driving experience. It was competent, but didn't reward or entice being wrung out enthusiastically.
BenjiS said:
I have driven the latest Corvette, coincidentally the day after driving an F-Type.
The Corvette's interior is shocking for the money. It's on par with a basic Fiesta.
That's odd, because I have one of the latest Corvettes and also one of the latest Porsches. The interiors of both cars are very comparable.The Corvette's interior is shocking for the money. It's on par with a basic Fiesta.
Perhaps you don't like Porsches either?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff