Pretty much everything I've seen online has been about the S or the R. I'd like to hear from owners of the base coupe about their cars. Seems to me it should have enough power for the street, with the same great looks and a more affordable sticker.

Also interested in a discussion of the factors behind Jaguar's initial de-emphasis on marketing the base coupe.

 

It's totally fine. You don't need all the extra technology and power in the S at all for fun. Just make sure that if you want the car to be loud, you pay $1,500 for the exhaust button.

 

Just marketing. Some would argue it's smarter to get the base since the other models cover the chassis cost. There are things that does affect performance like the diff but not a factor if you are just driving the car for fun.

 

Yes, what everyone else above said is spot on.

 

I am loving my base...came from the XF Supercharged which was a powerful sedan. The F is super fun to drive, sounds amazing and is fast enough for anything I am getting into. I opted for redzone leather, performance seats, the climate pack, the extended leather pack, the premium pack, and the vision pack.

Here is a link to the sound: http://youtu.be/_H1akAQrwgw

 

Spin Doc... I picked up my Base Coupe Friday (see thread for pics). I got it fully loaded including active exhaust, vision pack, premium pack, and a few accessories (design pack, sport steering wheel & hood louver's). I test drove an "S" convertible when I ordered my coupe... the pick up and ride feel were about the same as my base. The "S" is a nice step up with some additional sport features, but some that I personally wouldn't have noticed much or used... I am not into autocross and find the base is more than enough for my application. Besides that, insurance on these cars is a killer!

 

Picked up my base coupe on Friday as well, I got the active exhaust and a few other options bringing the MSRP up to $74k and I have the exact same look as the more expensive models...I must say I always thought it was a lot of car for the $$$ and after driving it a short while, I'm now even more convinced of that.

This Jaguar is all about style and the car has it in spades...

 

I always though that the V6 S Coupe was the right choice for me. But I saw a HP and torque graph somewhere that shows that the extra HP and torque is only available at high RPMs. It never dawned on me that that might be true. I knew it was the same basic engine, but never put 2 and 2 together.

There's such a large price difference ($12K) between the base and the S here in Canada that I'm thinking that may be the base ain't such a bad idea. I can pay extra for 19" wheels and the switchable exhaust, but what else would I be missing except the LSD and the configurable lighting? I'm not a fast driver and in Toronto maybe that's all I need.......?

 

Exactly, and I made the same decision you appear to have arrived at for the same reasons. However, in my case it was between the convertibles.

 

I have a basic base coupe. I reasoned that it had 40% more torque than any previous car (and more weight, but let's not go there...), the stereo had a higher output than my £4k Linn home system, and the standard equipment was a match for anything else I owned.

More importantly, it's an F-Type.

 

Speaking of torque, the base V6 has more peak torque than the 414 HP E92 M3 (332 ft/lbs vs. 295) and only 7 ft/lbs less than the V6S. It's torque that gives you that "kick in the pants" feel of acceleration from a standing start. The only time you might notice the difference in HP is when you in are in seriously illegal speed territory, and even then the difference is very subtle.

 

It think the different Diff ratio on the S may be the main difference. Basically the S is lower geared...

 

Another difference is the size of the brake rotors. The base fronts are smaller than those of the S. Has anybody seen a stopping distance comparison?

 

The upgraded suspension on the S is a biggie...I've read many times where the base coupe can be a trifle bouncy and after driving it a bit, I can see as to where that point might be valid.

But yeah, I'm with you guys too...$12k was a steep upcharge for things I probably wouldn't use or notice.

 

Yes, that's really the point if you're buying it for street use only.

 

By bouncy, do you mean that it is too taut or sporty? Or that it is the opposite and thus has the ability to handle pot holes and road imperfections better with less jarring?

Thanks!

 

What I read was that the electronic dampers on the S and R help the car follow the bumps and road imperfections better than the base suspension...in my short experience with the car, I can see as where the car has a slight tendency to repeatedly "bounce" just a bit on uneven roads but it certainly isn't disruptive and is certainly far less firm and harsh as some of the reviewers commented...it is firm for sure but not in a jarring way...feels very connected to the road. And solid as a rock!

 

Duplicate to below.

 

Actually, if anything the base suspension damping is very firm and it isn't "bouncy" enough for some tastes. I would never call the base suspension "bouncy" by any stretch of the imagination.

"Bouncy" to me means several up and down cycles, and the base suspension certainly does not do that. One compression is about it, which makes it feel very firm. However, more "jarring" might be a fair characterization.

 

Hmm...

Noting that mine is running 20" Gyrodynes like Foosh has on his:

At low speeds on rough surfaces its a very busy ride, but not actually harsh.

As the speed builds, it's noticeable that the ride smooths out - particularly over cats eyes (raised lane markers, in the event that they're called something else where you live), and other small bumps.

Once at speed, rolling undulations can cause a certain amount of heave (in the chassis, rather than the driver).

Basically it feels like the high frequency damping is good, the low frequency damping could be a little firmer, while the spring rates are slightly too high.