F Type Coupe V6 S or Cayman S?
Discussion
I am in the lucky position of wishing to buy a new second car and am looking at both of these. I am going to be test driving both this week, but wondered if anyone had an opinions, or preferably real world experience.
In terms of looks, I prefer the F type and like the fact it'll probably stand out more on the road, but think the driving dynamics of the cayman are likely to be better., and can't help feeling it's likely to be more reliable. The Cayman also seems a more practical option, with more storage space for weekends away.
I plan to keep the car for a long time, so not too worried about residuals or cost price, but it is a consideration. I gather discounts on Porsches are slim, but what about the F type?
In terms of looks, I prefer the F type and like the fact it'll probably stand out more on the road, but think the driving dynamics of the cayman are likely to be better., and can't help feeling it's likely to be more reliable. The Cayman also seems a more practical option, with more storage space for weekends away.
I plan to keep the car for a long time, so not too worried about residuals or cost price, but it is a consideration. I gather discounts on Porsches are slim, but what about the F type?
I looked at and tried both. I would say the Jag is closer to a GT car, in the sense that it is better suited to putting some luggage in the back and heading off for a few days. The Cayman is closer to a sports car in that it's more focused on pure driving and is a bit less comfortable.
It's not black and white though, more shades of grey.
It's not black and white though, more shades of grey.
The F-Type is far more dramatic to look at and you'll get a lot more attention in it. As a long term ownership prospect I'm still not convinced that JLR quality and in depth engineering quality is really that great, and that V6 engine b
dized from a V8 is almost offensive.
In their absolute darkest days of being infected with sttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.
dized from a V8 is almost offensive.In their absolute darkest days of being infected with s
ttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.dme123 said:
The F-Type is far more dramatic to look at and you'll get a lot more attention in it. As a long term ownership prospect I'm still not convinced that JLR quality and in depth engineering quality is really that great, and that V6 engine bdized from a V8 is almost offensive.
In their absolute darkest days of being infected with sttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.
Saves manufacturing costs to use the V8 block as the basis for the 6, but not even removing 2 cylinders?! Where can I read about this?dized from a V8 is almost offensive.In their absolute darkest days of being infected with s
ttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.Otispunkmeyer said:
Saves manufacturing costs to use the V8 block as the basis for the 6, but not even removing 2 cylinders?! Where can I read about this?
IIRC the block is different (the fourth pair of cylinder bores aren't actually there) but the crank-case is the same so the overall engine length is the same as the V8. 
dme123 said:
The F-Type is far more dramatic to look at and you'll get a lot more attention in it. As a long term ownership prospect I'm still not convinced that JLR quality and in depth engineering quality is really that great, and that V6 engine bdized from a V8 is almost offensive.
In their absolute darkest days of being infected with sttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.
Hardly that simple. The block isnt exactly the same, just the same length. edit- see above. mmmm... that CAD stuff ok for public?dized from a V8 is almost offensive.In their absolute darkest days of being infected with s
ttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.
No direct experience of either but you'd get out of the Jag an look back at it every time. The pork on the other hand is utterly forgettable.
Don't really get the negativity surrounding the Jag's V6. It's a great engine and makes no difference that the block is the same length as the V8.
Reliability wise, I'd also take the Jag. Jag consistently outscore Porsche on that score.
Don't really get the negativity surrounding the Jag's V6. It's a great engine and makes no difference that the block is the same length as the V8.
Reliability wise, I'd also take the Jag. Jag consistently outscore Porsche on that score.
dme123 said:
The F-Type is far more dramatic to look at and you'll get a lot more attention in it. As a long term ownership prospect I'm still not convinced that JLR quality and in depth engineering quality is really that great, and that V6 engine bdized from a V8 is almost offensive.
In their absolute darkest days of being infected with sttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.
Didn't Porsche do that for the 944 engine, half a 928 engine ? the history of the car is full of examples of modular engines, modular platforms and shock horror, guess what, half of Porsches are now based on Audis's and VW's ! dized from a V8 is almost offensive.In their absolute darkest days of being infected with s
ttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.I don't see why anyone would call it "borderline offensive", I am sure they could have designed a bespoke V6 but then the car would cost more.
I love the Cayman and have done since it first appeared. But even if the Cayman is the better drive I could not ignore the beauty of the F type, it's just stunning, And that sound!
Cayman S does look gorgeous as well though tbf, never understood the "forgetable" comments but each to their own. I'd be more than happy with either tbh but based purely on looks, sound and desirability i'd go F Type.
Cayman S does look gorgeous as well though tbf, never understood the "forgetable" comments but each to their own. I'd be more than happy with either tbh but based purely on looks, sound and desirability i'd go F Type.
kambites said:
Otispunkmeyer said:
Saves manufacturing costs to use the V8 block as the basis for the 6, but not even removing 2 cylinders?! Where can I read about this?
IIRC the block is different (the fourth pair of cylinder bores aren't actually there) but the crank-case is the same so the overall engine length is the same as the V8. I have a Cayman (although a 987) i've had a 981 for a week and have driven the F Type coupe on the road and all the convertibles on the track - my opinion.......they're the same (2 seats rear drive) but really quite different - you just need to make up your own mind.
The 981 drives better, the damping is better and being mid engined it just feels more secure, but is really quite sterile. The F Type looks much much better and the noise - well honestly you should just sign on the dotted for the noise. interior wise specced up they are both nice places to sit - that is one difference actually, you get a lot more as standard on the Jag, but they are quite similar in price once you spec them to a similar level.
The 981 drives better, the damping is better and being mid engined it just feels more secure, but is really quite sterile. The F Type looks much much better and the noise - well honestly you should just sign on the dotted for the noise. interior wise specced up they are both nice places to sit - that is one difference actually, you get a lot more as standard on the Jag, but they are quite similar in price once you spec them to a similar level.
J4CKO said:
dme123 said:
The F-Type is far more dramatic to look at and you'll get a lot more attention in it. As a long term ownership prospect I'm still not convinced that JLR quality and in depth engineering quality is really that great, and that V6 engine bdized from a V8 is almost offensive.
In their absolute darkest days of being infected with sttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.
Didn't Porsche do that for the 944 engine, half a 928 engine ? the history of the car is full of examples of modular engines, modular platforms and shock horror, guess what, half of Porsches are now based on Audis's and VW's ! dized from a V8 is almost offensive.In their absolute darkest days of being infected with s
ttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.I don't see why anyone would call it "borderline offensive", I am sure they could have designed a bespoke V6 but then the car would cost more.
Using a 90 degree V6 is already something I consider unacceptable in such an expensive car, and although you can use the argument "well it works well enough" for a £20k family hatchback I you should be entitled to higher expectations at this price point. When does it stop being unacceptable to use such major compromises to save costs? If Lamborghini sold a £150k car with a V8 that was actually using the same raw block as the V10 but with 2 cylinders left out would you think that was OK?
I'm perfectly happy with the shared Ford platform of my Volvo, and I've been happy with shared platforms of various other cars I've bought but this is something that is going to be making the car worse than it would otherwise have to be at a price point where nobody else seems to feel the need to do this. It also makes me wonder what other cheap shortcuts they've taken that I can't see - I can tell you that my S-Type Jaguar was absolutely full of shoddy engineering.
As I said the F-type looks amazing but things like this make me think that as a long term prospect it's possibly more sizzle than steak.
Edited by dme123 on Tuesday 24th February 12:52
dme123 said:
J4CKO said:
dme123 said:
The F-Type is far more dramatic to look at and you'll get a lot more attention in it. As a long term ownership prospect I'm still not convinced that JLR quality and in depth engineering quality is really that great, and that V6 engine bdized from a V8 is almost offensive.
In their absolute darkest days of being infected with sttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.
Didn't Porsche do that for the 944 engine, half a 928 engine ? the history of the car is full of examples of modular engines, modular platforms and shock horror, guess what, half of Porsches are now based on Audis's and VW's ! dized from a V8 is almost offensive.In their absolute darkest days of being infected with s
ttyness from Chrysler Mercedes pedalled a 90 degree V6, which is bad enough, but even they never sunk to the depths of using the V8 engine block and just not using 2 cylinders.I don't see why anyone would call it "borderline offensive", I am sure they could have designed a bespoke V6 but then the car would cost more.
Using a 90 degree V6 is already something I consider unacceptable in such an expensive car, and although you can use the argument "well it works well enough" for a £20k family hatchback I you should be entitled to higher expectations at this price point. When does it stop being unacceptable to use such major compromises to save costs? If Lamborghini sold a £150k car with a V8 that was actually using the same raw block as the V10 but with 2 cylinders left out would you think that was OK?
I'm perfectly happy with the shared Ford platform of my Volvo, and I've been happy with shared platforms of various other cars I've bought but this is something that is going to be making the car worse than it would otherwise have to be at a price point where nobody else seems to feel the need to do this. It also makes me wonder what other cheap shortcuts they've taken that I can't see - I can tell you that my S-Type Jaguar was absolutely full of shoddy engineering.
As I said the F-type looks amazing but things like this make me think that as a long term prospect it's possibly more sizzle than steak.
Edited by dme123 on Tuesday 24th February 12:52
I can see the point with the engine if it is a redundant bit of engine but I would like to see the respective blocks, realistically not sure it would make any difference, couple of kilos of aluminium additional, a bit less space than there could be, I would bet most owners don't care and think its fantastic.
From driving both I think the Cayman is the better drive. But the look of the F-Type and the noise if you get the optional sports exhaust is epic. It's a hard call. My head would take the Porsche with its 2 year service intervals, likely decent reliability and practicality, but my heart would sink a bit whenever I saw the Jag even though last time I drove the Jag I ended up with some bonus points on my licence. Oh and the Jag is a bit annoyingly big on some B-roads.
Otispunkmeyer said:
kambites said:
Otispunkmeyer said:
Saves manufacturing costs to use the V8 block as the basis for the 6, but not even removing 2 cylinders?! Where can I read about this?
IIRC the block is different (the fourth pair of cylinder bores aren't actually there) but the crank-case is the same so the overall engine length is the same as the V8. J4CKO said:
Whats the issue with the engine being a 90 degree V6 ? is that not a good configuration for a V6 ? genuinely don't know !
I can see the point with the engine if it is a redundant bit of engine but I would like to see the respective blocks, realistically not sure it would make any difference, couple of kilos of aluminium additional, a bit less space than there could be, I would bet most owners don't care and think its fantastic.
Scroll up on the thread. I can see the point with the engine if it is a redundant bit of engine but I would like to see the respective blocks, realistically not sure it would make any difference, couple of kilos of aluminium additional, a bit less space than there could be, I would bet most owners don't care and think its fantastic.
p.s. not sure what the problem is with a 90degree V6 either..?
Guess he's not a fan of the XJ220
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff