Cars That Should Have Been Stars But Weren't
#1
Cars That Should Have Been Stars But Weren't
While I have never had my car on a track and don't really push it on the road except in a straight line I never expected to see the F-Type listed on this Autocar list of Cars That Should Have Been Stars, But Weren't list. They specifically mention the V6.
I have no idea how credible Autocar is. They appear to be based in the UK.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news...nb7Kz#image=16
I have no idea how credible Autocar is. They appear to be based in the UK.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news...nb7Kz#image=16
The following users liked this post:
schuss (04-04-2022)
#3
“…the F-Type has a challenging chassis, at least in lesser V6 form.”
???
“…composure less complete than offered by either Porsche’s 718 or 911.”
Funny enough, I chose the F Type by miles after coming away quite disappointed from a test drive in a Boxster. And Alex from Carthrottle claimed he’d buy a V6 F Type over a 911, so I’m gonna say that settles it 🙃
???
“…composure less complete than offered by either Porsche’s 718 or 911.”
Funny enough, I chose the F Type by miles after coming away quite disappointed from a test drive in a Boxster. And Alex from Carthrottle claimed he’d buy a V6 F Type over a 911, so I’m gonna say that settles it 🙃
#4
#5
The easy part yes that Autocar is British, has been around since the beginning of time, and is generally very well regarded.
As to the larger question I think that the sales numbers are the incontrovertible answer. It is an extremely nice looking car but that’s it. The convertible is impracticable in the extreme. The idea of a car with no spare and no cargo area is not going to be appealing to many people. The chassis is a shortened XK.
I think my XK-8 and the 150 I had in school were both more successful automobiles
As to the larger question I think that the sales numbers are the incontrovertible answer. It is an extremely nice looking car but that’s it. The convertible is impracticable in the extreme. The idea of a car with no spare and no cargo area is not going to be appealing to many people. The chassis is a shortened XK.
I think my XK-8 and the 150 I had in school were both more successful automobiles
#6
From the introduction, there didn't seem to be a particular quantifiable measure of "success" or being a "star." On the F-Type, they focused particularly on the handling of the car. This is a bit unfair as this was never the point of the F-Type. It was never meant to compete against Porsche's offerings directly on the handling side and it doesn't drive like one. It's a fantastic GT car that sounds great, incredible in a straight line, comfy and rides well, and looks great. I reach for my SVR keys if I need to run errands, go out for a nice dinner, or go out for a fun drive etc. The F-Type is fun even when I don't push it and that's something that I really love about it. You can enjoy all the hilarity of the noise and the pops without needing to wring its neck. And it still handles very well - I far prefer it to my C63S or other AMGs I've driven like the E63S.
I also have a 911 GT3. That's a completely different car that is very focused on driving and handling. The GT3 in sharp contrast to the F-Type isn't very fun if you're not driving it hard. The engine makes all its power north of 6K RPMs and has almost nothing down below. It's a car that I go out to drive hard and drive focused on the weekends. It's also slower in a straight-line in most scenarios thanks to the powerband of the engine. You stomp on the F-Type pedal and you're gone.
Really a silly article IMHO.
I also have a 911 GT3. That's a completely different car that is very focused on driving and handling. The GT3 in sharp contrast to the F-Type isn't very fun if you're not driving it hard. The engine makes all its power north of 6K RPMs and has almost nothing down below. It's a car that I go out to drive hard and drive focused on the weekends. It's also slower in a straight-line in most scenarios thanks to the powerband of the engine. You stomp on the F-Type pedal and you're gone.
Really a silly article IMHO.
#7
Weird list. Whoever wrote that doesn't seem to know quite what they're talking about. Just something posted on an msn page and just doesn't seem to match autocar's otherwise serious writing. Autocar generally also rate the F-Type high in the reviews on their own site, for instance in this one:
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review...type-2014-2019
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review...type-2014-2019
Last edited by MajorTom; 04-05-2022 at 02:55 PM.
Trending Topics
#8
I beg to differ. The F-Type was marketed and sold as a sports car as opposed to the GT’s which preceded it. The all purpose answer as to why the F type did not have a particular feature was that it was a true sports car and like the 911 didn’t have it. A garage door opener, Sacre Bleu! The 911 was clearly the benchmark.
The truth of the matter is that it’s a shortened XK chassis that is overweight and in its heavyweight AWD V8 iterations doesn’t handle that well. Many believe that the lighter weight V6 with RWD and manual transmission came the closest to the sports car goal.
So at the end of the day it’s a miss. Not a GT or a Sports car, A piece of automobile sculpture. Like an Avanti.
And the proof is it doesn’t sell. I see more Ferrari’s than F-types.
The truth of the matter is that it’s a shortened XK chassis that is overweight and in its heavyweight AWD V8 iterations doesn’t handle that well. Many believe that the lighter weight V6 with RWD and manual transmission came the closest to the sports car goal.
So at the end of the day it’s a miss. Not a GT or a Sports car, A piece of automobile sculpture. Like an Avanti.
And the proof is it doesn’t sell. I see more Ferrari’s than F-types.
Last edited by Suaro; 04-05-2022 at 06:10 PM.
#9
#10
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DGL
F-Type ( X152 )
3
09-27-2014 11:51 PM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)