SKY
Kraftwagen König
They are not the only ones that have gone mad.
F-Type [Official] Jaguar F-Type
- Thread starter Levi68
- Start date
-
- Tags
- f-type jaguar jaguar f-type
The Jaguar F-Type (X152) is a series of two-door, two-seater sports cars manufactured by British car manufacturer Jaguar Land Rover under their Jaguar Cars marque from 2013 to 2024. The car's JLR D6a platform is based on a shortened version of the XK's platform. It is the so-called "spiritual successor" to the E-Type.
They are not the only ones that have gone mad.
DeDe
Subscriber
First of all they measure weight with driver and equipment - the weight of the car is 1760 kgs.
Seconds, unlike other magazines they measure the braking distance from the point the driver pushes the brake pedal. Most magazines starts the measuring at 110-115 kph.
My God, that sounds bloody amazing.
D
Deleted member 25
The sound is meh, i have seen the car irl, the rear is amazing, the rest is good but nothing extraordinary.
Kilcrohane
Porsche Perfektionist
+++ Big cat murdered by stingray +++
As predicted, the F-type has been categorically murdered by the excellent, value for money Corvette C7, in its most important American market.
The excellent Baron95 from XFforum.co.uk reports that stock is building up on dealer forecourts, in the most affluent areas. JLR will report booming sales of the F-type and all Jags tomorrow, for July, but the truth is anathema to the JLR scoundrels.
Even though Car & Driver did their best to stretch the truth about the F-type V8's accleration times - suspiciously being almost half a second ahead of even Jaguar's own PR(Autocar) times, at 3.6 s to 4 s - everyone now knows after the first drive reports of the new Corvette that it is the real deal, a properly engineered sports car, that can take it to the 911 S, never mind the 4,000 lb F-type V8, and is nearly $50k cheaper to boot. The wonderful new lovingly engineered Corvette has destroyed the F-type, as I said it would.
Baron95 highlights the stock of F-types already building up at Madison Jaguar - see link below. No wonder when a base V6 335 hp F-type retails at a shocking $74k.
Jaguar likes to show fully-loaded V8 versions in its promo material for the F-type; now we know why. Take a look at the white V6 in the advert below:
http://www.autofind.com/group/details/209/158057/SAJWA6E78E8K01008/
In no way does this base car shout 74 big ones, especially the dreadful interior and appallingly cheap-looking instrument binnacle.
0% financing over 48 months, or 1.9% over 60 months, just a couple of months after an enormously high profile and hugely hyped by the media launch, tells you all you need to know about the reported sales 'success' of this cynical disgrace to automotive engineering and the E-type name.
http://www.xfforum.co.uk/threads/17...-Jaguar-F-type-Now-0-Financing-over-48-months
PS elsewhere on XFforum.co.uk the first owners of the XF with the 'new' supercharged 3-litre V6 petrol - the same engine in the F-type - are reporting fuel economy of 16 litres per 100 km, or 18 mpg imp./15 mpg US! Little did they know the 'V6' was of course just another cynical JLR PR scam, with its V8 block and old technology.
JLR's chickens are coming home to roost.
As predicted, the F-type has been categorically murdered by the excellent, value for money Corvette C7, in its most important American market.
The excellent Baron95 from XFforum.co.uk reports that stock is building up on dealer forecourts, in the most affluent areas. JLR will report booming sales of the F-type and all Jags tomorrow, for July, but the truth is anathema to the JLR scoundrels.
Even though Car & Driver did their best to stretch the truth about the F-type V8's accleration times - suspiciously being almost half a second ahead of even Jaguar's own PR(Autocar) times, at 3.6 s to 4 s - everyone now knows after the first drive reports of the new Corvette that it is the real deal, a properly engineered sports car, that can take it to the 911 S, never mind the 4,000 lb F-type V8, and is nearly $50k cheaper to boot. The wonderful new lovingly engineered Corvette has destroyed the F-type, as I said it would.
Baron95 highlights the stock of F-types already building up at Madison Jaguar - see link below. No wonder when a base V6 335 hp F-type retails at a shocking $74k.
Jaguar likes to show fully-loaded V8 versions in its promo material for the F-type; now we know why. Take a look at the white V6 in the advert below:
http://www.autofind.com/group/details/209/158057/SAJWA6E78E8K01008/
In no way does this base car shout 74 big ones, especially the dreadful interior and appallingly cheap-looking instrument binnacle.
0% financing over 48 months, or 1.9% over 60 months, just a couple of months after an enormously high profile and hugely hyped by the media launch, tells you all you need to know about the reported sales 'success' of this cynical disgrace to automotive engineering and the E-type name.
http://www.xfforum.co.uk/threads/17...-Jaguar-F-type-Now-0-Financing-over-48-months
PS elsewhere on XFforum.co.uk the first owners of the XF with the 'new' supercharged 3-litre V6 petrol - the same engine in the F-type - are reporting fuel economy of 16 litres per 100 km, or 18 mpg imp./15 mpg US! Little did they know the 'V6' was of course just another cynical JLR PR scam, with its V8 block and old technology.
JLR's chickens are coming home to roost.
mentir
Precision Tuner
I was starting to wonder what your old pal "Baron95 from the XFForum" has been up to. Hats off to you for taking the time to fastidiously watch that forum so that we at GCF can get timely, same-day updates! As always, thanks for saving us all a trip to the XFForum.co.uk!
I can only imagine your dismay when Car & Driver tested the Porsche Cayman S PDK turning out a 0-60mph of 4.1 seconds, nearly a half second quicker than Porsche USA's quoted 4.6 seconds.
I would say that I agree with you that you should never solely rely on a magazine to inform your opinion...
...but that's exactly what you're doing by taking them at face value regarding the yet-to-be-released new Corvette.
Mr. Mercedes
Premium
This car is so hohum. And the interior looks like a 90's black plastic wonderland. There's no design flair whatsoever.
Kilcrohane
Porsche Perfektionist
The worldwide car media has just about given up trying to convince the most simpleton saps that the F-type is a legitimate sports car, one that can be put up against 911s, Boxsters, Corvettes and so on, so now they've taken Jaguar PR department's lead and put it up against heavy, folding roof cruisers, boulevardiers, for 60+ yr olds. Even then, it fails miserably:
http://www.autozeitung.de/auto-verg...-500-roadster-bilder-technische-daten-gn23482
but how else could it not, given that everyone must now know it's just an 8 yr old chopped XK - and hence just an XK without a boot - genius.
Auto Zeitung, like Auto Motor und Sport and Auto Bild before them, with their F-type tests, try their best to suggest the comparison with the SL500 was a very close run thing, and hence 'keep buying our magazine to see how other close dices with the resurgent competiton to the Big German 3 turn out to keep us in business', when of course on closer inspection of how the points were awarded it is clear that the gap was embarrassingly great, forIndia's Britain's pride and joy.
How about awarding a whopping 38 extra points to the F-type for top speed, when the SL is regulated to 250 km/h, which of course can be raised by the dealer if the owner desires? Pathetic attempt to make the gap look smaller.
A few 'highlights' of the F-type V8 S from the article:
it has no boot - yep, even corporate shill Clarkson has had to admit this
it's cramped, even though it's a full 4 cm wider than the SL - thanks to its ancient XJ 2002/XK 2005 platform
it's dreadfully noisy - a pathetic attempt to cover up its inherent aging GT-cruiser platform with unbearable loud noise
it's poorly built in relation to the SL - surely not! A JLR product with poor build quality!
has sweet f.a. in the way of modern safety assistant systems - er, because it's nowt but an 8 yr old XK without a boot
at autobahn speeds the rear hops about - again thanks to the ancient platform and the 53/47 F/R weight balance.
over 130 km/h/80 mph, with the roof closed, it's impossible to have a conversation, due to the noise coming in
test fuel consumption of 13.7 l/100km - 17 mpg US - against 11.5 l for the SL500
the F-type 'wins' the Dynamic section because you can turn the ESP off - wow! a proper sports car!
the cruiser SL500 - not the S63/65 AMGs - is as fast around the slalom cones as the uber sporting V8 S F-type
the cruiser SL500 stops in essentially the same distance as the uber F-type, but somehow Auto Zeitung manages to contrive a 26 point advantage for the F-type's more cold to warm inconsistent brakes
So overall, take back the ridiculous 38 points for the speed limiter of the SL500, the 25-odd points for the brakes and the equally ridiculous near 20 points for the SL's higher base price, although its standard equipment level is much higher and the real points gap to the F-type grows from 140 odd to well over 200. A thumping difference, and one that would truly refelect how poor the top of the range F-type is, even when compared to a folding roof, large booted cruiser, aimed at Palm Beach retirees.
Game over for this incredibly cynical sack of merde. Much ado bout f*ck all, in other words, as is now the standard operating procedure for Tata's PR-infested/nil engineering JLR.
PS has DeDe or Soup got a scan available of this article?
http://www.autozeitung.de/auto-verg...-500-roadster-bilder-technische-daten-gn23482
but how else could it not, given that everyone must now know it's just an 8 yr old chopped XK - and hence just an XK without a boot - genius.
Auto Zeitung, like Auto Motor und Sport and Auto Bild before them, with their F-type tests, try their best to suggest the comparison with the SL500 was a very close run thing, and hence 'keep buying our magazine to see how other close dices with the resurgent competiton to the Big German 3 turn out to keep us in business', when of course on closer inspection of how the points were awarded it is clear that the gap was embarrassingly great, for
How about awarding a whopping 38 extra points to the F-type for top speed, when the SL is regulated to 250 km/h, which of course can be raised by the dealer if the owner desires? Pathetic attempt to make the gap look smaller.
A few 'highlights' of the F-type V8 S from the article:
it has no boot - yep, even corporate shill Clarkson has had to admit this
it's cramped, even though it's a full 4 cm wider than the SL - thanks to its ancient XJ 2002/XK 2005 platform
it's dreadfully noisy - a pathetic attempt to cover up its inherent aging GT-cruiser platform with unbearable loud noise
it's poorly built in relation to the SL - surely not! A JLR product with poor build quality!
has sweet f.a. in the way of modern safety assistant systems - er, because it's nowt but an 8 yr old XK without a boot
at autobahn speeds the rear hops about - again thanks to the ancient platform and the 53/47 F/R weight balance.
over 130 km/h/80 mph, with the roof closed, it's impossible to have a conversation, due to the noise coming in
test fuel consumption of 13.7 l/100km - 17 mpg US - against 11.5 l for the SL500
the F-type 'wins' the Dynamic section because you can turn the ESP off - wow! a proper sports car!
the cruiser SL500 - not the S63/65 AMGs - is as fast around the slalom cones as the uber sporting V8 S F-type
the cruiser SL500 stops in essentially the same distance as the uber F-type, but somehow Auto Zeitung manages to contrive a 26 point advantage for the F-type's more cold to warm inconsistent brakes
So overall, take back the ridiculous 38 points for the speed limiter of the SL500, the 25-odd points for the brakes and the equally ridiculous near 20 points for the SL's higher base price, although its standard equipment level is much higher and the real points gap to the F-type grows from 140 odd to well over 200. A thumping difference, and one that would truly refelect how poor the top of the range F-type is, even when compared to a folding roof, large booted cruiser, aimed at Palm Beach retirees.
Game over for this incredibly cynical sack of merde. Much ado bout f*ck all, in other words, as is now the standard operating procedure for Tata's PR-infested/nil engineering JLR.
PS has DeDe or Soup got a scan available of this article?
DeDe
Subscriber
I cannot get enough of your posts 
FYI they did not created this scoring system only for the F-Type, it's their proven methode
@ noise: the article states that above 130 kph you cannot be as relaxed as before, there's no word about not having a conversation - to be honest at 73 dB(A) even the granny would here you whispering.
@ the brakes: they gave 9 more points to the F-Type because of the better pedal-feel, 13 more points for the cold result (-1,3 metres) and 4 more points for the warm result (-0,4 m) - that means one point for each 0,1 metre braking distance.
@ handling (dynamic) section: the F-Type won because of the better handling, steering, faster tracktime and faster slalomspeed. Its advantage is only 19 points out of 1000.
FYI they did not created this scoring system only for the F-Type, it's their proven methode
@ noise: the article states that above 130 kph you cannot be as relaxed as before, there's no word about not having a conversation - to be honest at 73 dB(A) even the granny would here you whispering.
@ the brakes: they gave 9 more points to the F-Type because of the better pedal-feel, 13 more points for the cold result (-1,3 metres) and 4 more points for the warm result (-0,4 m) - that means one point for each 0,1 metre braking distance.
@ handling (dynamic) section: the F-Type won because of the better handling, steering, faster tracktime and faster slalomspeed. Its advantage is only 19 points out of 1000.
Kilcrohane
Porsche Perfektionist
thanks for the scan of the datasheet
- I kinda knew that. The point I made was why manipulate the points gap to the SL by marking the SL down by a huge, distorting to the overall total, 38 points, for an artificial speed limiter? Everyone knows the SL500 will run to 170 mph plus easily. Total garbage by AZ - merely an attempt to hide the F-type's blushes, and get punters to buy their rag, in the belief that the non-German makers are not anywhere other than a million miles off the German pace.
- you're spinning. the original words: 'Zwar halten sich die Luftverwirbelungen in Grenzen, ab Tempo 130 kann man sich aber schon nicht mehr entspannt unterhalten.'
'nicht entspannt unterhalten' implies the need to raise one's voice to be heard, okay. In a €25k ragtop, like an MX5, that may be okay, but in a €100k plus one, that, as much as you spin it, is a joke.
By the way, 67 dB to 73 dB - the noise levels in the SL and F-type respectively at 130 km/h - is a huge difference. It's not 10% or so louder but several times louder.
- I appreciate all the great scans you do, but don't try to come over all clever-cloggy.
- first off, brake application and brake feel are notoriously subjective - an ideal area so for the AZ journo to bump the F-type ahead, by a gratuitous almost 10 points. The objective testing of the brakes showed the SL's brakes to be more consistent from cold to warm conditions, and less than a half a metre extra stopping distance in the more typical warm operating condition. They hinted the SL's brakes became 'soft' but suspiciously couldn't say that they had fade or failed.
- as I explained, which you've conveniently ignored, a lot of the F-type's supposed dynamic advantage on this test against the SL500, in the author of the article's mind, appears to stem from the ability of the F-type to switch its ESP off, and to allow oversteer. Given that 90% plus of the buyers of the SL and F-type are 60 years and older, the ability to lose control of the back end, and as the author said, burn up €1,200 worth of tyres in a few minutes is hardly a positive thing, in fact, given that they marked the F-typed down for traction, due to its ancient platform and nose heaviness, it could as easily be viewed as a demerit.
The point stands; the F-type in its most 'sportiest' variant lost clearly to the inordinately better engineered boulevard cruiser SL500. The margin of defeat would have been at least half as big again if the author hadn't used the spurious speed limiter and subjective rating of brake feel and 'tail happiness' to cover the ancient, obese F-type's blushes. Hope you 'can't get enough' of this post too.
Kilcrohane
Porsche Perfektionist
F-type 1,791 kg SL500 1,1810 kg
a folding roof, up to 400 litres size boot, boulevard cruiser, loaded to the gunwales with state of the art safety kit, 19 kgs heavier than a 'lightweight' old-school, rag top 'sports car' - only JLR could do such alchemic engineering - that of turning gold into lead.
And why would AZ state the factory weight of the V8 F-type at 1,736 kg, when Jaguar itself says 1,665 kg? Are they trying to hide the bloat - an extra 126 kgs - and so the lie of the 'lightweight sports car'?
a folding roof, up to 400 litres size boot, boulevard cruiser, loaded to the gunwales with state of the art safety kit, 19 kgs heavier than a 'lightweight' old-school, rag top 'sports car' - only JLR could do such alchemic engineering - that of turning gold into lead.
And why would AZ state the factory weight of the V8 F-type at 1,736 kg, when Jaguar itself says 1,665 kg? Are they trying to hide the bloat - an extra 126 kgs - and so the lie of the 'lightweight sports car'?
Similar threads
Jaguar Land Rover
Jaguar Land Rover Automotive PLC is the holding company for
Jaguar Land Rover Limited, also known as JLR, a British
multinational manufacturer of luxury and sports utility vehicles.
JLR, headquartered in Whitley, Coventry, UK, is a subsidiary of
Tata Motors. Jaguar and Land Rover, with histories dating to
the 1920s and 1940s, merged in 1968 under British Leyland.
They later became independent and were subsidiaries of BMW and
Ford. In 2000, BMW dissolved the Rover Group, selling Land
Rover to Ford. Since 2008, Tata Motors has owned Jaguar Land
Rover.
Official website: JLR
Official website: JLR
