Says it has a great "ride" - this will make one of our local forum haters mad no doubt because his whole schtick is that Jags don't ride well. C&D says they do.
2014 Jaguar F-type V-8 S Test – Review – Car and Driver

 

It better ride nice--it weighs just a few hundred pounds less than an XJ luxury saloon!

I kid, I kid...

 

Jaguar reviews are always welcome, good, bad or indifferent, and the forum is a great place to discuss them. Reviewer opinions will differ, as will forum members, but that's simply the nature of opinions. Best to simply ignore the ones you wish. I do that all the time when it comes to Jeremy Clarkson types that care more about entertainment than serious reporting...which unfortunately includes far too many automotive journalists.

Bruce

 

Scott

If you wish to hold on to an adversarial attitude, that is your choice. I will try not to respond with the likes, while staying with the subjects. I think I complimented your choices more than enough times and also purchased 4 Jaguars in the row to be labeled a Jaguar "hater".

Anyways, I must call attention to what I said about my test drive of the V8 F-type on the XJ forum. Sounds like my description was accurate. Here it is:

https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/x...t-drive-98952/

"The V8 F-type is both and animal and a fine car. Most interestingly, since I have ride issues with my XJL I was looking at the ride quality. To my HUGE surprise, I found the ride on 20" wheels to be smoother and definitely better than my vibrating XJL on 19" and even better than my V8, 2012 XF on 18" wheels. The steering wheel was rock solid and calm, no undue road vibrations or roughness coming through the chassis. "

So, while I loved the ride, I loved the power, I criticized the car's curb weight, at the factory stated 3670 lbs. Of course, as it seems it is actually 300 lbs heavier as shown by this and an other test and, here is what C&D said about it (with just about every single pro tester criticizing the same):

"Various bits fell off; how can something built out of aluminum weigh so much?"

So, sounds like I was right there with the consensus tester opinions.

Scott, you are a cheerleader for Jaguar. That is truly fine with me, I love cheerleaders, in general. However, I am an engineer and a very highly respected and paid one in my profession. I tend to look very close to how things are designed, how they put together and how they work. I "know" how things SHOULD work and "know" how they SHOULD be put together. I can also connect causal relationships effectively. So, perhaps I am more critical of design and implementation faults than most people but, hey, this forum can use some counterweight to pure adulterated cheer-leading. After all we need to be told of perceived faults and guest readers need to know what potentials issues they might face by getting into these cars. As to how I approach reading reviews; I always place more weight on negative reviews because it is human nature that people who own particular cars or equipment tend to over emphasize the positives for their choices and underplay the negatives. I don't work that way.

I am sorry if I offended you by my critical reviews, I was not trying. I hope we'll settle down to liking AND criticizing Jaguars as I would hope that you recognize that no car is perfect. Not even Jaguars.

Albert

 

Bruce

We were talking about 6-speed vs. 8-speed transmission advantages;

Note the ratios on the V8 F-type. 6th gear is 1:1, making it a close ratio transmission. Which is why, IMO, the F-type accelerates a fair amount quicker with less power than the XKR 6sp. with more engine power. There is not enough weight difference between the two to justify the time difference so, it is very likely the closer transmission ratios providing the edge. Those ratios are superb for track and fast street driving, BTW.

http://media.caranddriver.com/files/...-type-v8-s.pdf

Compare those ratios to the 2014 Vette's wider ratios and that might also explain why the F-type with 500lbs+ extra weight, lower HP-to-weight ratios and identical torque values is accelerating quicker than the Vette. The Vette needs that extra 8th gear with closer ratios to properly apply of its power-to-weight advantages.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/cm/roada.../vettecomp.pdf

Albert

 

True, and the Vette is always quicker with an auto than a stick, so the F-type has that advantage plus while it has more hp, its peak hp also holds to redline whereas the Stingray falls off, and that's the only part of the powerband used for flat out acceleration.

I suspect Jaguar may have lifted some of the power limitters in the Tranny Control Unit now that it has a few years of 5L S/C reliability history under its belt. That would also give it an advantage over the XK's.

Bruce

 

Do you have a dyno graph for the XKR or the F-type V8? I'd like to see the torque curve. I notice that the F-type peak torque is listed at an extremely low engine speed of 2500 RPM and remembering something that you posted previously regarding the "flat" torque curve of the SC engine.

Albert

 

Albert,

Here's one thread with a before and after tune dyno. I suspect the torque dip is a 3rd gear to 4th shift point but can't say for sure. They can't be locked into 4th from low rpm without it kicking down when going wide open throttle as far as I know.
https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/x...-review-75060/

Also, the Z51 Stingray has close ratio gears that the base Stingray hasn't. The R&T article didn't make reference to it having the Z51 performance package, so hard to say. I expect to try one soon, but I'd personally be more interested in the auto if it would be suitable for the track. I enjoy the antiquated stick, and am happy to play with them in my dinosaur sports cars.

Bruce

 

51


Bruce

Looks like you missed attaching the link to those graphs. Thank you for your efforts and if not too much trouble, could you find it again?

You are correct in saying that the Z51 would come with closer ratios. Since the R&T chart did not specify Z51 for that particular car, I compared it to the Motor Trend test specs. While MT specs do not show the individual gear ratios they do show the total final ratio to be 1.64 for the Z51 equipped car. That is the same final ratio that could be derived from the R&T chart, (3.42x0.48). So, looks like this is what the Vette "close ratio" would be. Not nearly as aggressive as the F-type.

Yes, I also enjoy the stick but, a good, fast auto will beat them any day. The question is how good the Vette's auto will be and, I believe, they will retain the 6-speed box.

Albert

 

Oops...added to post #8, Albert...and you might recognize it!

Bruce

 

I don't see it - you can love a car and be critical of many points - for improvement's sake. No offense, I like reading both your comments, and I think this controversy is merely a windmill you're jousting...

 

I guess I won't be visiting these forums any longer. I don't see the point. The moderators seem to think that anything goes. This thread about the F-Type review has been hijacked by one or two people talking about Corvettes and XKRs. It's a shame but I think the Google+ Jaguar community is where I will spend my time. Best wishes to all.

 

The Corvette was originally modeled after the XK120 (any by extension, its successors). So I think it's somewhat fitting that people are still comparing the two!

But yes, the thread has gone off subject. What are moderators to do? Delete all the posts?

 

Every single post was a relevant comparison to the F-type, one way or an other. The Corvette is considered a comparable sports car, thus the data comparisons regarding transmission ratios and power curves, as opposed to the F-type and the XKR (they share the engine) is valid.

If Scott wants to have his own sandbox and keep others out, he may wish to build it somewhere else.

Albert