is the F type a supercar?

is the F type a supercar?

Author
Discussion

bordseye

Original Poster:

1,394 posts

137 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
Well, is it?

Magic919

14,126 posts

146 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
No.

TrackTwit

423 posts

71 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
No.

johnxjsc1985

15,935 posts

109 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
no but this is.

Andy M

3,701 posts

204 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
No.

Pork

9,449 posts

179 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
No.

bordseye

Original Poster:

1,394 posts

137 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
550 bhp in 1.5 tonnes, looks good . not dissimilar to a 458 or a 991 in bhp/tonne. or are they not supercars either. or is it that the jag is british.

Got to wondering about the pecking order of supercars. I had been planning on buying myself a 430 but I cant see a decent one much below 100k and I dont want to spend that much. Yet a V8 aston is half that cost and newer to boot, as is a porker. So I find myself wondering which way to go and on looks alone, the Jag has to be in there.

Bebee

4,384 posts

170 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
No but the 220 is.

RichB

42,187 posts

229 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
bordseye said:
Got to wondering about the pecking order of supercars. I had been planning on buying myself a 430 but I cant see a decent one...<etc>
So you fancy an F-Type but aren't sure because people don't consider it a "supercar"?

Anyway, if you look at the list of cars people are expecting to be admitted to the grid at Goodwood's Breakfast Club tomorrow it seems like anything with an Aston, Porsche, Ferrari badge qualifies so I don't see why not a Jag laugh

TrackTwit

423 posts

71 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
Bhp alone does not make a supercar, or bhp per tonne. It's soooooo much more than that. A Caterham R500 is not a supercar because It has 500bhp per tonne etc etc.
It's the whole package.

An F type is a sports car, no more no less.

Chebble

1,585 posts

97 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
bordseye said:
550 bhp in 1.5 tonnes, looks good . not dissimilar to a 458 or a 991 in bhp/tonne. or are they not supercars either. or is it that the jag is british.

Got to wondering about the pecking order of supercars. I had been planning on buying myself a 430 but I cant see a decent one much below 100k and I dont want to spend that much. Yet a V8 aston is half that cost and newer to boot, as is a porker. So I find myself wondering which way to go and on looks alone, the Jag has to be in there.
As said, a supercar is much, much more than just a power figure. It's an idea as much as anything. Heritage plays a large part, but isn't essential (see Pagani, Koenigsegg et al.). As shallow as it sounds, name means a lot, unless the car is exceptional (Lexus LFA etc.). Being merely fast and powerful means nothing - few would consider the Nissan GTR a supercar.

Don't be so silly. Being British has nothing to do with it - Mclaren?

For the record, I've used 'supercar' loosely; I can't stand the word 'Hypercar'

johnxjsc1985

15,935 posts

109 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
i think it is a fantastic stand alone car if it floats your boat why would you not buy one

Ferruccio

890 posts

64 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
No.
The XJ220 is.

bordseye

Original Poster:

1,394 posts

137 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
Heritage? But Jag has far more heritage than Lambo for example. Or Lexus . And arguably has a better heritage than Aston.

johnxjsc1985

15,935 posts

109 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
Ferruccio said:
No.
The XJ220 is.
the original XJ220 could have been even better had they stuck to the original idea.

RamboLambo

4,843 posts

115 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
Errrrrr NO. Nice sounding Jag though

RichB

42,187 posts

229 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
Without getting into a Jaguar vs Aston Martin argument remember that Swallow Sidecars were re-bodying Austins when Aston were finishing first in class and 5th overall at Le Mans and winning races like the Ulster TT. Jaguar had a fantastic period winning Le Mans in the 1950s but when talking about heritage understand that the Aston-Martin story goes back to 1913, it didn't start with the DB4. Anyway back to genuine 'supercars', how about an Aston Martin One-77? wink

Chebble

1,585 posts

97 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
bordseye said:
Heritage? But Jag has far more heritage than Lambo for example. Or Lexus . And arguably has a better heritage than Aston.
Oh give over. You've picked up on one of the aspects I identified. I love Jaguar, seriously, and their success is brilliant in my opinion. However, consider the two Marques alongside each other - which has produced the most 'supercars'?

Seriously, and consider your argument:

Miura
Countach
Diablo
Murcielago
Aventador

...and that is just their V12 flagship models.

What do Jaguar have to reply to those models...?


johnxjsc1985

15,935 posts

109 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
Chebble said:
Oh give over. You've picked up on one of the aspects I identified. I love Jaguar, seriously, and their success is brilliant in my opinion. However, consider the two Marques alongside each other - which has produced the most 'supercars'?

Seriously, and consider your argument:

Miura
Countach
Diablo
Murcielago
Aventador

...and that is just their V12 flagship models.

What do Jaguar have to reply to those models...?
Not the best comparison.But for me personally I would have the Jag everyday of the week and save myself enough to buy another one.
YOu can use the Jag everyday how many on your list can be taken to Tesco's for the weekly shop.
I love Lambo's if nothing else because they are not Ferrari but we shouldnt really be comparing a mass production vehicle with a bespoke one.

garyhun

27,395 posts

173 months

Saturday 2nd May 2015
quotequote all
If you have to ask the question ....