RE: Jaguar F-Type 2.0 vs. Porsche 718 Cayman
Discussion
I scratched my Jag itch when I was 30 with a 1983 XJS HE.
It delivered a stunning amazing 300bhp, drank 4* at the rate of 15mpg. You couldn't jump into it on a winter's morning and drive off. Nothing much would happen until the temp gauge had moved half way to N. The three speed box meant for very lazy driving. It needed to be serviced every six months. I gave up on it when the ECU short-circuited in hot weather making it a game of chance if it started.
Never again!
It delivered a stunning amazing 300bhp, drank 4* at the rate of 15mpg. You couldn't jump into it on a winter's morning and drive off. Nothing much would happen until the temp gauge had moved half way to N. The three speed box meant for very lazy driving. It needed to be serviced every six months. I gave up on it when the ECU short-circuited in hot weather making it a game of chance if it started.
Never again!
audidoody said:
I scratched my Jag itch when I was 30 with a 1983 XJS HE.
It delivered a stunning amazing 300bhp, drank 4* at the rate of 15mpg. You couldn't jump into it on a winter's morning and drive off. Nothing much would happen until the temp gauge had moved half way to N. The three speed box meant for very lazy driving. It needed to be serviced every six months. I gave up on it when the ECU short-circuited in hot weather making it a game of chance if it started.
Never again!
Because a 1983 XJS is representative of the current range of cars.It delivered a stunning amazing 300bhp, drank 4* at the rate of 15mpg. You couldn't jump into it on a winter's morning and drive off. Nothing much would happen until the temp gauge had moved half way to N. The three speed box meant for very lazy driving. It needed to be serviced every six months. I gave up on it when the ECU short-circuited in hot weather making it a game of chance if it started.
Never again!
Doesn't Jag offer any rebates in the UK? I know you can get a LOT off here in Germany, which makes the pricing argument a bit naff. I got my one year old MY16 F-Type R for 60% of MSRP with just a few thousand miles on the old odometer last year and I know of several people in our German forums as well as the US ones who scored rebates in the 20% range when purchasing brand new. I suspect that may not be the case in the UK, where these cars do move a lot quicker and there's more demand for them?
Anyway, I'm a deserter from the Porsche camp (and you certainly couldn't get a rebate like that from Porsche, I can attest to that) and couldn't be happier with the switch. The 981.2 (or 718 whatever) never appealed to me in my hunt for a new car last year. Coming from a 997, I didn't really want to trade "up" for one. What was there to gain? Worse engine noise, worse steering feel, subjectively worse looks, but slightly better acceleration values (though probably only with PDK, which would not have been an option for me anyhow).
After considering many cars, from 991.1CS to R8V10 to the C7, I somehow ended up with an F-Type R (of all things, the last car I ever considered to tradeup to...heavy, no manual, "Jaguar"). So, what convinced me? Well, I have to say, the F-Type is just one of those cars that makes you fall in love with it, despite its flaws. It's arguably not the best sports car compared to the others on my list, but that doesn't mean it's not a hell of a lot of fun. In just a single year, I've driven it more than I did my 997 in three! What convinced me? Intoxicating thrust, intoxicating engine noise, no rattles and squeaks in the interior (one of the reasons I got rid of my 997), interesting driving dynamics and, yes of course, extremely satisfyingly good looks.
Of course, the F-Type is a very rare car on our streets and your constantly in some form of contact with passersby, many will wave or give a thumps up, there's rarely a day where some guy (mostly older dudes) doesn't come up to me to ask about the car. That kind of attention will be annoying to many drivers and I'm not a very outgoing person myself, but people always seem happy to see it (kids, particularly) and learn about the car, I really enjoy that. Compare that to me old 997. In Germany, 911 drivers have a certain stigma attached nowadays. It's not really bad, but not really good either. Nobody will pay much attention to one, but when people know you drive one, they'll have a certain idea in their head. Particularly, if you're a younger guy in your 20s (like me) or 30s, people will always have a certain attitude towards you that is not very pleasant. I've not witnessed any such thing with the F-Type, which seems, paradoxically because it's vastly more expensive than my 997 and arguably looks the part as well, to be more of a "people's car".
Anyway, I'm a deserter from the Porsche camp (and you certainly couldn't get a rebate like that from Porsche, I can attest to that) and couldn't be happier with the switch. The 981.2 (or 718 whatever) never appealed to me in my hunt for a new car last year. Coming from a 997, I didn't really want to trade "up" for one. What was there to gain? Worse engine noise, worse steering feel, subjectively worse looks, but slightly better acceleration values (though probably only with PDK, which would not have been an option for me anyhow).
After considering many cars, from 991.1CS to R8V10 to the C7, I somehow ended up with an F-Type R (of all things, the last car I ever considered to tradeup to...heavy, no manual, "Jaguar"). So, what convinced me? Well, I have to say, the F-Type is just one of those cars that makes you fall in love with it, despite its flaws. It's arguably not the best sports car compared to the others on my list, but that doesn't mean it's not a hell of a lot of fun. In just a single year, I've driven it more than I did my 997 in three! What convinced me? Intoxicating thrust, intoxicating engine noise, no rattles and squeaks in the interior (one of the reasons I got rid of my 997), interesting driving dynamics and, yes of course, extremely satisfyingly good looks.
Of course, the F-Type is a very rare car on our streets and your constantly in some form of contact with passersby, many will wave or give a thumps up, there's rarely a day where some guy (mostly older dudes) doesn't come up to me to ask about the car. That kind of attention will be annoying to many drivers and I'm not a very outgoing person myself, but people always seem happy to see it (kids, particularly) and learn about the car, I really enjoy that. Compare that to me old 997. In Germany, 911 drivers have a certain stigma attached nowadays. It's not really bad, but not really good either. Nobody will pay much attention to one, but when people know you drive one, they'll have a certain idea in their head. Particularly, if you're a younger guy in your 20s (like me) or 30s, people will always have a certain attitude towards you that is not very pleasant. I've not witnessed any such thing with the F-Type, which seems, paradoxically because it's vastly more expensive than my 997 and arguably looks the part as well, to be more of a "people's car".
freeman2344 said:
Doesn't Jag offer any rebates in the UK? I know you can get a LOT off here in Germany, which makes the pricing argument a bit naff. I got my one year old MY16 F-Type R for 60% of MSRP with just a few thousand miles on the old odometer last year and I know of several people in our German forums as well as the US ones who scored rebates in the 20% range when purchasing brand new. I suspect that may not be the case in the UK, where these cars do move a lot quicker and there's more demand for them?
Anyway, I'm a deserter from the Porsche camp (and you certainly couldn't get a rebate like that from Porsche, I can attest to that) and couldn't be happier with the switch. The 981.2 (or 718 whatever) never appealed to me in my hunt for a new car last year. Coming from a 997, I didn't really want to trade "up" for one. What was there to gain? Worse engine noise, worse steering feel, subjectively worse looks, but slightly better acceleration values (though probably only with PDK, which would not have been an option for me anyhow).
After considering many cars, from 991.1CS to R8V10 to the C7, I somehow ended up with an F-Type R (of all things, the last car I ever considered to tradeup to...heavy, no manual, "Jaguar"). So, what convinced me? Well, I have to say, the F-Type is just one of those cars that makes you fall in love with it, despite its flaws. It's arguably not the best sports car compared to the others on my list, but that doesn't mean it's not a hell of a lot of fun. In just a single year, I've driven it more than I did my 997 in three! What convinced me? Intoxicating thrust, intoxicating engine noise, no rattles and squeaks in the interior (one of the reasons I got rid of my 997), interesting driving dynamics and, yes of course, extremely satisfyingly good looks.
Of course, the F-Type is a very rare car on our streets and your constantly in some form of contact with passersby, many will wave or give a thumps up, there's rarely a day where some guy (mostly older dudes) doesn't come up to me to ask about the car. That kind of attention will be annoying to many drivers and I'm not a very outgoing person myself, but people always seem happy to see it (kids, particularly) and learn about the car, I really enjoy that. Compare that to me old 997. In Germany, 911 drivers have a certain stigma attached nowadays. It's not really bad, but not really good either. Nobody will pay much attention to one, but when people know you drive one, they'll have a certain idea in their head. Particularly, if you're a younger guy in your 20s (like me) or 30s, people will always have a certain attitude towards you that is not very pleasant. I've not witnessed any such thing with the F-Type, which seems, paradoxically because it's vastly more expensive than my 997 and arguably looks the part as well, to be more of a "people's car".
Very well explained and I share your sentiment when it comes down to the 'driving experience'. Anyway, I'm a deserter from the Porsche camp (and you certainly couldn't get a rebate like that from Porsche, I can attest to that) and couldn't be happier with the switch. The 981.2 (or 718 whatever) never appealed to me in my hunt for a new car last year. Coming from a 997, I didn't really want to trade "up" for one. What was there to gain? Worse engine noise, worse steering feel, subjectively worse looks, but slightly better acceleration values (though probably only with PDK, which would not have been an option for me anyhow).
After considering many cars, from 991.1CS to R8V10 to the C7, I somehow ended up with an F-Type R (of all things, the last car I ever considered to tradeup to...heavy, no manual, "Jaguar"). So, what convinced me? Well, I have to say, the F-Type is just one of those cars that makes you fall in love with it, despite its flaws. It's arguably not the best sports car compared to the others on my list, but that doesn't mean it's not a hell of a lot of fun. In just a single year, I've driven it more than I did my 997 in three! What convinced me? Intoxicating thrust, intoxicating engine noise, no rattles and squeaks in the interior (one of the reasons I got rid of my 997), interesting driving dynamics and, yes of course, extremely satisfyingly good looks.
Of course, the F-Type is a very rare car on our streets and your constantly in some form of contact with passersby, many will wave or give a thumps up, there's rarely a day where some guy (mostly older dudes) doesn't come up to me to ask about the car. That kind of attention will be annoying to many drivers and I'm not a very outgoing person myself, but people always seem happy to see it (kids, particularly) and learn about the car, I really enjoy that. Compare that to me old 997. In Germany, 911 drivers have a certain stigma attached nowadays. It's not really bad, but not really good either. Nobody will pay much attention to one, but when people know you drive one, they'll have a certain idea in their head. Particularly, if you're a younger guy in your 20s (like me) or 30s, people will always have a certain attitude towards you that is not very pleasant. I've not witnessed any such thing with the F-Type, which seems, paradoxically because it's vastly more expensive than my 997 and arguably looks the part as well, to be more of a "people's car".
F-Types are as common as muck around Newcastle for some reason. Usually driven by some bellend trying to impress passers by with their engine note by driving around in first everywhere. At least they won't be able to do this with the 2.0 model 
Still, they aren't as common as Porsches.
Still, they aren't as common as Porsches.
As an owner of a 2.0 718 for the past 8 months, in which time I've covered nearly 10k miles in varying in weather conditions & uses (it's my only car so duties as daily driver for school runs, supermarket shop, business and obviously pleasure) I can agree that the noise could be better but the pros far out weigh this one con that everyone loves jumping on the bandwagon about. The car get regularly admired by a wide cross section of people at petrol stations & car parks (lovely car mate...) and shock horror some of these people even say it sounds good...
My last car was a 2014 Audi S3 so same power as the Cayman, but in every other way an inferior driving experience, anyone that tries to compare the Cayman to a hot hatch (however good - Golf R etc) needs to drive the two back to back.
With regard to the list price issue, apart from my first car (£2k banger) when I was a student some 20+ years ago, I have never paid cold hard cash for a new or nearly new car and having read an article recently virtually no one does (over 80% of new cars sold are bought on some form of finance, PCP etc). My Audi S3 was circa £35k with options & my 718 was circa £50k with options however the Porsche only costs around �50 per month more on a PCP, this is due to its superior retained value after 3 years I'm told. So I, like many others I would imagine, don't take much notice of the headline list price as I will never actually pay for the car in full, just use any residual value left over as the deposit for the next having budgeted a proportion of my income to cover the monthly payment no different than people do for mortgages & mobile phones etc.
My last car was a 2014 Audi S3 so same power as the Cayman, but in every other way an inferior driving experience, anyone that tries to compare the Cayman to a hot hatch (however good - Golf R etc) needs to drive the two back to back.
With regard to the list price issue, apart from my first car (£2k banger) when I was a student some 20+ years ago, I have never paid cold hard cash for a new or nearly new car and having read an article recently virtually no one does (over 80% of new cars sold are bought on some form of finance, PCP etc). My Audi S3 was circa £35k with options & my 718 was circa £50k with options however the Porsche only costs around �50 per month more on a PCP, this is due to its superior retained value after 3 years I'm told. So I, like many others I would imagine, don't take much notice of the headline list price as I will never actually pay for the car in full, just use any residual value left over as the deposit for the next having budgeted a proportion of my income to cover the monthly payment no different than people do for mortgages & mobile phones etc.
First off, a disclaimer. I think the sound of most engines with fewer than 5 cylinders sucks. It just does. The manufacturers try to camouflage this with optional sports exhausts and extra pops and bangs but basically, they still suck. If you think differently or if sound doesn't matter to you, that's fine. This post is not for you. 
When Porsche decided they "had to" go the downsized turbo route to improve the headline fuel consumption figures of the updated 718, why oh why did they not develop a flat 6 of 1.8 and/or 2.0 capacity with a turbo to produce outputs in the 300-350 range like what they have now but with the sound and drama you should be able to expect from a Porsche sports car? Similar to what they did with the revised 911. Mazda had a 1.8 litre V6 in the 90's for their MX-3 and I'm sure it made a big different to the feel of driving it compared to the 4 pot versions (hint hint Mazda by the way).
I would bet every penny of money I don't have that the REAL WORLD consumption and even the *ahem* EU test figures of the 6 cyclinder engined cars would match the 4's or be near enough as to make no difference. And then, if they still really really wanted to put a 4 cylinder in as an entry level model with the best headline consumption figures for buyers who only look at those numbers, they still could have done so. Like Jaguar have done, except it hardly seems entry level.
Does anyone know why Porsche didn't do this?
When Porsche decided they "had to" go the downsized turbo route to improve the headline fuel consumption figures of the updated 718, why oh why did they not develop a flat 6 of 1.8 and/or 2.0 capacity with a turbo to produce outputs in the 300-350 range like what they have now but with the sound and drama you should be able to expect from a Porsche sports car? Similar to what they did with the revised 911. Mazda had a 1.8 litre V6 in the 90's for their MX-3 and I'm sure it made a big different to the feel of driving it compared to the 4 pot versions (hint hint Mazda by the way).
I would bet every penny of money I don't have that the REAL WORLD consumption and even the *ahem* EU test figures of the 6 cyclinder engined cars would match the 4's or be near enough as to make no difference. And then, if they still really really wanted to put a 4 cylinder in as an entry level model with the best headline consumption figures for buyers who only look at those numbers, they still could have done so. Like Jaguar have done, except it hardly seems entry level.
Does anyone know why Porsche didn't do this?
hughfh said:
First off, a disclaimer. I think the sound of most engines with fewer than 5 cylinders sucks. It just does. The manufacturers try to camouflage this with optional sports exhausts and extra pops and bangs but basically, they still suck. If you think differently or if sound doesn't matter to you, that's fine. This post is not for you.
When Porsche decided they "had to" go the downsized turbo route to improve the headline fuel consumption figures of the updated 718, why oh why did they not develop a flat 6 of 1.8 and/or 2.0 capacity with a turbo to produce outputs in the 300-350 range like what they have now but with the sound and drama you should be able to expect from a Porsche sports car? Similar to what they did with the revised 911. Mazda had a 1.8 litre V6 in the 90's for their MX-3 and I'm sure it made a big different to the feel of driving it compared to the 4 pot versions (hint hint Mazda by the way).
I would bet every penny of money I don't have that the REAL WORLD consumption and even the *ahem* EU test figures of the 6 cyclinder engined cars would match the 4's or be near enough as to make no difference. And then, if they still really really wanted to put a 4 cylinder in as an entry level model with the best headline consumption figures for buyers who only look at those numbers, they still could have done so. Like Jaguar have done, except it hardly seems entry level.
Does anyone know why Porsche didn't do this?
It's CO2 though. We bought ours before the latest gov tax F up so the road tax is amusingly cheap. You are right about the consumption though, granted as hasn't covered many miles but rarely see better than mid 20s mpg. When Porsche decided they "had to" go the downsized turbo route to improve the headline fuel consumption figures of the updated 718, why oh why did they not develop a flat 6 of 1.8 and/or 2.0 capacity with a turbo to produce outputs in the 300-350 range like what they have now but with the sound and drama you should be able to expect from a Porsche sports car? Similar to what they did with the revised 911. Mazda had a 1.8 litre V6 in the 90's for their MX-3 and I'm sure it made a big different to the feel of driving it compared to the 4 pot versions (hint hint Mazda by the way).
I would bet every penny of money I don't have that the REAL WORLD consumption and even the *ahem* EU test figures of the 6 cyclinder engined cars would match the 4's or be near enough as to make no difference. And then, if they still really really wanted to put a 4 cylinder in as an entry level model with the best headline consumption figures for buyers who only look at those numbers, they still could have done so. Like Jaguar have done, except it hardly seems entry level.
Does anyone know why Porsche didn't do this?
I have no idea why not a small 6 cyl turbo but I think they said space. Also mot sure how much the 2.0 block has in common with 3.0 six in the 911. I seem to remember hearing it has some commonalities with the 919 but that may have been marketing bs
shost said:
hughfh said:
First off, a disclaimer. I think the sound of most engines with fewer than 5 cylinders sucks. It just does. The manufacturers try to camouflage this with optional sports exhausts and extra pops and bangs but basically, they still suck. If you think differently or if sound doesn't matter to you, that's fine. This post is not for you.
When Porsche decided they "had to" go the downsized turbo route to improve the headline fuel consumption figures of the updated 718, why oh why did they not develop a flat 6 of 1.8 and/or 2.0 capacity with a turbo to produce outputs in the 300-350 range like what they have now but with the sound and drama you should be able to expect from a Porsche sports car? Similar to what they did with the revised 911. Mazda had a 1.8 litre V6 in the 90's for their MX-3 and I'm sure it made a big different to the feel of driving it compared to the 4 pot versions (hint hint Mazda by the way).
I would bet every penny of money I don't have that the REAL WORLD consumption and even the *ahem* EU test figures of the 6 cyclinder engined cars would match the 4's or be near enough as to make no difference. And then, if they still really really wanted to put a 4 cylinder in as an entry level model with the best headline consumption figures for buyers who only look at those numbers, they still could have done so. Like Jaguar have done, except it hardly seems entry level.
Does anyone know why Porsche didn't do this?
It's CO2 though. We bought ours before the latest gov tax F up so the road tax is amusingly cheap. You are right about the consumption though, granted as hasn't covered many miles but rarely see better than mid 20s mpg. When Porsche decided they "had to" go the downsized turbo route to improve the headline fuel consumption figures of the updated 718, why oh why did they not develop a flat 6 of 1.8 and/or 2.0 capacity with a turbo to produce outputs in the 300-350 range like what they have now but with the sound and drama you should be able to expect from a Porsche sports car? Similar to what they did with the revised 911. Mazda had a 1.8 litre V6 in the 90's for their MX-3 and I'm sure it made a big different to the feel of driving it compared to the 4 pot versions (hint hint Mazda by the way).
I would bet every penny of money I don't have that the REAL WORLD consumption and even the *ahem* EU test figures of the 6 cyclinder engined cars would match the 4's or be near enough as to make no difference. And then, if they still really really wanted to put a 4 cylinder in as an entry level model with the best headline consumption figures for buyers who only look at those numbers, they still could have done so. Like Jaguar have done, except it hardly seems entry level.
Does anyone know why Porsche didn't do this?
I have no idea why not a small 6 cyl turbo but I think they said space. Also mot sure how much the 2.0 block has in common with 3.0 six in the 911. I seem to remember hearing it has some commonalities with the 919 but that may have been marketing bs
Turbo or not... once you start pressing on, mpg will plummets.
freeman2344 said:
Doesn't Jag offer any rebates in the UK? I know you can get a LOT off here in Germany, which makes the pricing argument a bit naff. I got my one year old MY16 F-Type R for 60% of MSRP with just a few thousand miles on the old odometer last year and I know of several people in our German forums as well as the US ones who scored rebates in the 20% range when purchasing brand new. I suspect that may not be the case in the UK, where these cars do move a lot quicker and there's more demand for them?
How? I would give my left nut for a F-Type in LHD right now...The Jag is sort of...horrid. It stinks of the 90s, like a big undesirable ford coupe or something. Wrong engine, too heavy for what it is, too big to pull off the "elegant" styling..
The Cayman used to be my "halo car" - something I thought I could realistically reach for if I wanted. Now it's just so bland.. An engine I don't want in a body that looks like it was designed by committee (you can't put your finger on why you don't want it, but you don't want it).
The only desirable stuff under 100 grand these days either comes from Lotus (an Evora just looks better and better) or comes in the form of a small city car - an UP, or a 500/Abarth or something. When a 12 grand 208 has a nicer interior than a 50 grand Jag there's a serious problem.
It's such a shame TVR aren't aiming for this middle ground. If they could get something to market in the 50 grand range I'm so sure they'd mop up.
The Cayman used to be my "halo car" - something I thought I could realistically reach for if I wanted. Now it's just so bland.. An engine I don't want in a body that looks like it was designed by committee (you can't put your finger on why you don't want it, but you don't want it).
The only desirable stuff under 100 grand these days either comes from Lotus (an Evora just looks better and better) or comes in the form of a small city car - an UP, or a 500/Abarth or something. When a 12 grand 208 has a nicer interior than a 50 grand Jag there's a serious problem.
It's such a shame TVR aren't aiming for this middle ground. If they could get something to market in the 50 grand range I'm so sure they'd mop up.
PunterCam said:
The Cayman used to be my "halo car" - something I thought I could realistically reach for if I wanted. Now it's just so bland.. An engine I don't want in a body that looks like it was designed by committee (you can't put your finger on why you don't want it, but you don't want it).
Front looks like a Toyota from the 981 onwards. Should have stuck with the oval headlights.hughfh said:
First off, a disclaimer. I think the sound of most engines with fewer than 5 cylinders sucks. It just does. The manufacturers try to camouflage this with optional sports exhausts and extra pops and bangs but basically, they still suck. If you think differently or if sound doesn't matter to you, that's fine. This post is not for you.
When Porsche decided they "had to" go the downsized turbo route to improve the headline fuel consumption figures of the updated 718, why oh why did they not develop a flat 6 of 1.8 and/or 2.0 capacity with a turbo to produce outputs in the 300-350 range like what they have now but with the sound and drama you should be able to expect from a Porsche sports car? Similar to what they did with the revised 911. Mazda had a 1.8 litre V6 in the 90's for their MX-3 and I'm sure it made a big different to the feel of driving it compared to the 4 pot versions (hint hint Mazda by the way).
I would bet every penny of money I don't have that the REAL WORLD consumption and even the *ahem* EU test figures of the 6 cyclinder engined cars would match the 4's or be near enough as to make no difference. And then, if they still really really wanted to put a 4 cylinder in as an entry level model with the best headline consumption figures for buyers who only look at those numbers, they still could have done so. Like Jaguar have done, except it hardly seems entry level.
Does anyone know why Porsche didn't do this?
the legislation is only getting tighter. i think they had to go 2 liter. from that, 4 cylinders is just more efficient overall, 500cc/cyl.When Porsche decided they "had to" go the downsized turbo route to improve the headline fuel consumption figures of the updated 718, why oh why did they not develop a flat 6 of 1.8 and/or 2.0 capacity with a turbo to produce outputs in the 300-350 range like what they have now but with the sound and drama you should be able to expect from a Porsche sports car? Similar to what they did with the revised 911. Mazda had a 1.8 litre V6 in the 90's for their MX-3 and I'm sure it made a big different to the feel of driving it compared to the 4 pot versions (hint hint Mazda by the way).
I would bet every penny of money I don't have that the REAL WORLD consumption and even the *ahem* EU test figures of the 6 cyclinder engined cars would match the 4's or be near enough as to make no difference. And then, if they still really really wanted to put a 4 cylinder in as an entry level model with the best headline consumption figures for buyers who only look at those numbers, they still could have done so. Like Jaguar have done, except it hardly seems entry level.
Does anyone know why Porsche didn't do this?
That MX3 engine wasn't that good really. VERY thirsty and not that characterful. 4 pots can be ok with tuning, esp of intake and exhaust, but Porsche haven't pulled it off. or maybe they were too constrained with oem targets (emissions and reliability)? i suspect Ver2 will be much improved.
Flat 6s can only appreciate now. i have 2 flat 4s, very characterful!
Yipper said:
The biggest problem with buying a cheap Porker or Jag is that you're gonna get beat at some point by a Golf R or Audi S3 on a lease and then you'll be left with horrific buyer's remorse.
The biggest problem with leasing a Golf R or Audi S3 is that you're gonna draw up next to something that looks a bit more interesting at the lights, like a Porsche or Jag, and you'll be left flooring it like a dick to beat them away from the lights while they ease away having not even noticed your hatchback.HighwayStar said:
craigjm said:
HighwayStar said:
Is that really a serious question!!!??
Anyone looking at a F-Type/Cayman isn't gone come to be considering a Audi/Seat/Skoda/BMW/Ford as an option
Are you saying that the Audi TTRS and the BMW Z4 etc are not competitors to the Cayman? OK the current Z4 isn't great but there is a new one on the way. Anyone looking at a F-Type/Cayman isn't gone come to be considering a Audi/Seat/Skoda/BMW/Ford as an option
"Every manufacturer can make a 2 litre 4-pot turbo with 300 ish bhp these days (even Honda have managed it) - so what is so special about the F-Type/Cayman?"
The TT RS has 400bhp and isn't a 2 litre 4-pot.
You could throw the TTS in there, it's basically a Golf R... as you say, the Z4 is dead, the new one is on the way.
He was talking about the hot hatch brigade having the same power as the Jag or Porka so why consider the 2 seater....
So if Ford/Seat/Audi and Skoda (the last 3 would be the same car
) care to pop their 300bhp/2ltr 4s into a 2 seater we can have that conversation.Apologies Craig, edited, it was Mr Tidy's quote
Edited by HighwayStar on Monday 21st August 16:16
You've summed up what I was getting at very well - why pay £50K for a 2 litre 4-pot turbo Jag with only 2 seats when you can buy a Focus RS, Leon Cupra, Type-R, Golf R for nearly £20K less that has more seats and similar performance?
Unless it's all about being pretentious?
I'd much rather spend less than £40K on a V8 Mustang Fastback that comes with 400 bhp as standard and have some performance upgrades later!
PunterCam said:
It's such a shame TVR aren't aiming for this middle ground. If they could get something to market in the 50 grand range I'm so sure they'd mop up.
I wouldn't be so sure about that. To a whole generation of drivers they are a complete unknown and to others they are remembered for bits falling off and stuff like that. They have an uphill struggle to relaunch with what they are doing never mind a crowded battleground and that would be the same for any company trying to come back from the dead. They haven't built a car for over ten years and that's a lifetimeIn the car industry.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff