RE: Jaguar F-Type 2.0 vs. Porsche 718 Cayman

[alorotom]

I have considered a Cayman previously a mk1 gen2 but the Jag never really entered my realm of consideration ... not sure why - poss I don't associate the brand with "sports" anymore as the badge is more likely to be seen on an xf/xe/xj none of which are poor cars but not in the demograph I was looking at

[paralla]

F1GTRUeno said:

I'm pretty sure a RWD coupe is going to tick plenty of boxes that a FWD hatchback with the same power can't.

People in the market for a Cayman or F-Type will never have the notion of a similarly powerful hatchback flash into their heads so stop trying to equate them just because they've got the same power.

I have a 385bhp GT4 and a 310bhp Golf R daily driver. People suggesting a similarly powerfull hatchback for much less money is anything like the same thing have never driven a propper sports car.

[The Surveyor]

Mr Tidy said:

......

The point I was trying to make was that I wouldn't pay a 50+ per cent premium just to get a Porker or Shaguar that didn't do anything much that an Audi/Seat/Skoda/BMW/Ford couldn't do!

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?

Maybe you wouldn't pay a premium, but there are plenty who would. Car ownership is a little more than 'top trumps' where a simple bhp figure wins, for many people there is a pride in ownership of something visually exciting that goes beyond logic and numbers. I don't think anybody has ever parked an A3, Leon or a Civic in a car park, walked away and looked back thinking 'hell yeh' like you would with the Jag or Porsche. However fast the latest GTi / R / RS is on the track, on the road they're just an expensive hatchback.

For me, the Cayman maybe a better drive when you're 'on it' but the Jag just looks like a premium GT, especially in that blue, with that coloured interior. Compared to the 911 or the V8 F- Types, both are quite a bargain too.

[E65Ross]

Mr Tidy said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Because people who are after an F-Type or Cayman are going to be swayed by the fact that a hatchback has the same numbers from a similar engine and think y'know what? I'll have one of them instead.

Don't be bloody ridiculous.

Thanks for that!

The point I was trying to make was that I wouldn't pay a 50+ per cent premium just to get a Porker or Shaguar that didn't do anything much that an Audi/Seat/Skoda/BMW/Ford couldn't do!

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?

So why did you say "because people" when what you really meant was "I wouldn't...."?

[fido]

Mr Tidy said:

Every manufacturer can make a 2 litre 4-pot turbo with 300 ish bhp these days (even Honda have managed it)

Harsh.

I think Honda, albeit supercharged versions of the K20, were making 300bhp+ years ago.

Edited by fido on Monday 21st August 09:36

[markoslater]

Your facts are a little out-dated with this story. From End of May the 2018 MY Cayman 718 comes standard with a DAB radio and Connect Plus and The Porsche Satnav and actually costs £42,897 with no extras. I think all your prices for the extras are a little out as well, I know cos I have one on order about to be delivered and managed to get the price to an eye watering £58k. I tested the V6 340bhp F-type back in Jan when I ordered the Cayman and to be honest it felt, big, fat, heavy, hard to see out of (I'm 6'3") and hard to really place on the road with confidence. Maybe its something you get used to but no comparison to the light agile nimble 718 Cayman.

Edited by markoslater on Monday 21st August 10:26

[Gecko1978]

craigjm said:

J4CKO said:

A lady at work had the V6, not the S, or the V8, and she loved it, she thought it was really, really fast, she didnt really put her foot down all that much, I suspect had never used full throttle, yet she was still over the moon with the car.

I think this is the truth for most owners of any car you can think of. Using a car on the road means that once you get past a certain level of power and handling it just cannot be exploited fully on the road. It is for this reason that cars like the MX5 are so much fun to drive.

The vast majority of modern Porsches and Jaguars etc are used for anything near their limits for less than 10% of the time so I see no problem with these engines. I guarantee that if you put Mike Cross / Walter Rhol in these 2.0 versions and then gave a PH driving god the most powerful version they would still lose in any race because driving a car fast is not just about power and handling it is about driver ability and for 99% of the driving population their talent runs out far before that of even the small engine versions of these cars.

This is reality - I used to have an impreza around 300bhp 0-60 around 5 second mark and around 160 at the top end...an you know what most days I sat in traffic at 30mph wondering if I should swap the head unit out for a more modern one not if I should get a larger turbo or some kangaroo paw break discs

10 years on ford Honda etc all do hatchbacks that are likely faster than that an so to these cars that offer even more performance most of it which will never be used.

Most people buy cars because they like the look the brand what it displays to the world - at this level very much so. Consider % of 50k coupes sold in the uk I suspect 10k a year or more now consider number of people who do track days in those same cars I bet its in the hundreds.

Its great that cars like these exist and if I was looking to buy a 2nd car as a toy this would be my max budget but for me at least I would look at a used car with more performance...and still spend 90% of my time doing 30mph in it wondering if I should upgrade the stereo

[Ray_Aber]

An interesting debate.

For me, it's the Jaguar. The Porsche isn't helped by its cement colour and black wheels combo (and the Jag is perhaps unfairly enhanced by a stunning colour, great interior and gorgeous alloys), but for me - and, I suspect, for many - buying a car at this price point is not about traffic light drag race comparisons or lap times.

It's the emotional experience of owning and driving a car. That starts when you approach it, take in its looks, get inside, absorb the driving environment around you, start the engine and savour (hopefully) the noise generated - then drive the car. The drive is hugely important - but for many owners, it's one element of a greater whole. A poor drive can be a deal-breaker (quite right too) but if a car had good handling and is enjoyable to drive, then the distinction between very good and great becomes less important. If that were not the case, we would all be rushing to Hethel to buy a Lotus.

The Jaguar is a car I would look forward to seeing and driving. It would be a rubberneck car in that I'd always be looking back after parking it. You just won't get that with a VW Golf R, no matter how good the underpinnings. Unfortunately for me, I'm not sure I would get that either with the Cayman, even in cobalt blue and silver alloys.

I would with the 981 Boxster though :-)

[kostas_miata]

£50k for a 4 cylinder non-special "sports car" is a lot. Don't doubt they will have a special feeling driving them compared to hot hatches, but the potential buyer might as well save up a bit and go for the sportier versions.

[jonm01]

Cayman would be perfect if they just sorted the gear ratios. The long gearing spoils it.

[TameRacingDriver]

ash73 said:

Why? The 2.0 F-Type has plenty of power and handles better, so it's a better drive than the "sportier versions", and it's cheaper to buy and run.

Yeah but it sounds crap and for many the noise of a sports car is one of the most important aspects.

A GT86 likely handles better again and costs half as much, that is the problem. At least when it costs £25K instead of £50K you can forgive the crappy engine note.

[anonymous-user]

jonm01 said:

Cayman would be perfect if they just sorted the gear ratios. The long gearing spoils it.

The manual car has 6 gears,

• If you don't like 6th , use 5th
• If you don't like 5th , use 4th
• If you don't like 4th , use 3rd
• If you don't like 3rd, use 2nd
• If you don't like 2nd, use 1st

Or is there something I've missed?

[kostas_miata]

ash73 said:

Why? The 2.0 F-Type has plenty of power and handles better, so it's a better drive than the "sportier versions", and it's cheaper to buy and run.

If you're gonna spend £50k+ on a sports car might as well spend a bit more and get a proper one. I'd take the V6 supercharged all day and have a proper soundtrack.
Yes, it will be more expensive to run but at the end of the day I don't think the 4cyl will make you smile as much as the V6.

[Regiment]

The F Type is far too expensive and I don't like Porsches. The F-Type should be around the 40000+ figure or are they terrified of a bunch of yoinks like me getting my greasy hands on one.

[CM954]

rockin said:

jonm01 said:

Cayman would be perfect if they just sorted the gear ratios. The long gearing spoils it.

The manual car has 6 gears,

• If you don't like 6th , use 5th
• If you don't like 5th , use 4th
• If you don't like 4th , use 3rd
• If you don't like 3rd, use 2nd
• If you don't like 2nd, use 1st

Or is there something I've missed?

I'd wondered this too and assumed it would have something to do with the gap between 1st and 2nd being too large (and maybe something to do with synchromesh??) as to why in reality this isn't a solution. ie - it's just awkward and leaves the engine out of it's sweet spot too often.

[kostas_miata]

ash73 said:

Isn't that a bit cheapskate compared to the V8?

Ha in a way it is, but the V8 is a lot more expensive! Jaguar has managed to make the V6 very good in all aspects that if you drove the V6 and a V8 drives by, you wouldn't be that depressed

Edited by kostas_miata on Monday 21st August 14:00

[paralla]

In my mind Jaguars are old mens cars and Porsches arent.

Jag's in the golf club car park, shall we shag now or shall we shag later?

Not ever having driven a Jaguar I have no idea if there's anything to this thought process but at 45 I still consider myself far too young to be driving a Jaguar of any kind.

Offering a manual transmission in your affordable sports coupe might help dispel the stereotype.

[craigjm]

Why are people equating price to engine size with comments like "50k for 2 litre engine is too much". There is a vast difference between say a 2.0 Mondeo of 20 years ago and these cars here. I don't hear people make the same argument against the likes of the Alfa 4C or the Lotus Elise / Exige that are about the same money with 1800cc. Are those cars "not sports cars" because of their engines too?

[Paddy78]

CM954 said:

rockin said:

jonm01 said:

Cayman would be perfect if they just sorted the gear ratios. The long gearing spoils it.

The manual car has 6 gears,

• If you don't like 6th , use 5th
• If you don't like 5th , use 4th
• If you don't like 4th , use 3rd
• If you don't like 3rd, use 2nd
• If you don't like 2nd, use 1st

Or is there something I've missed?

I'd wondered this too and assumed it would have something to do with the gap between 1st and 2nd being too large (and maybe something to do with synchromesh??) as to why in reality this isn't a solution. ie - it's just awkward and leaves the engine out of it's sweet spot too often.

Something to do with the fact that you can do 70mph in 2nd... Kind of rendering all other gears useless if revving out at legal speeds. You get to do one gear change and then stay in 2nd for the rest of your drive out in the country. £1500 fixes that with a diff and final drive, but would also probably ruin you fuel economy.

[amgmcqueen]

My god these cars sound like crap!

As a petrolhead it is quite sickening to witness these once great sports cars constantly getting ever more regulated and watered down.