That's a pretty disappointing outcome and quite opposite of what most journalists have found with the Coupe. Even though they admit it isn't the fastest of its class, it was always the one they preferred to drive. It sounds like the MT folks were too chicken to take it to its limit, they admit as much in the article.

The time difference with the vert is still pretty shocking.

 

AMERICA BABY.

Jaguar North America need to pull the finger out. Shift, that Jaguar marketing guy and the (british) engineer we met at Laguna Seca during Car week both said the same thing.

R Coupe should've been a lot faster. It sounds like bs to me. Perhaps Corvette took them out to a nice dinner and gave them some free cars.

 

The worlds greatest drag race video is in :
http://m.motortrend.com/wot/1409_wor...re_wvideo.html

The F-Type did well, came in third behind the 911 Turbo S and the GT-R at 11.8 for the quarter mile.

 

Why did the guy getting into the Z28 try to do it Dukes of Hazard style without opening the door?

 

Damn the Porsche got sub 11.


Overall, I think with the F-Type Jaguar has officially moved out of the "makes flashy sports cars that can't compete on performance" category (Alfa, Aston, Maserati, old Jaguar) and now it's at the table of serious sports cars.

 

The R did indeed lay down a decent performance in this year's Ver. 4. (Thanks for posting, Abed.)

Quite a gap in terminal speed between the 126mph and 125.3mph of the Porsche and Nismo, and the 122.3mph of the R. The weight of the Turbo S is 3550-3600lbs or so, with the Nismo and R around the same 3900lbs, give or take a few lbs. The power output of each of the three vehicles, though, is within 50HP of each other. All this tells me the gap in trap speeds between the R and the Porsche and Nismo is just as much about AWD traction. The first couple hundred feet of the track is essential to a good ET, while the last half of the track is essential to a good trap speed. (I was impressed by the M4's performance, lagging at the start, but coming on strong at the end. As has been the case at times for BMW, there is likely more HP in that motor (BMW claims 425hp in the M4). That would help explain its 4th place finish mentioned at the start of this thread.)

But, I'm not complaining!

 

Comparison from last year:
Coupe R 11.8 @ 122.3mph (3rd place)
Vert V8S 12.1 @ 120.2mph (7th place)

 

Ironically, versus last year's Vert the Coupe is slower at Laguna Seca and placed 9th vs 4th overall. Still think MT screwed up the lap times/worn out the tires trying to tame the beast

 

Pleasantly surprised by the M4. Still won't get one because of principle: the fake engine sound through the speakers that you can't disable! Still can't believe they would do that.

 

Im on a plane and cant download the dang vid--- can someone give me the play by play???!!!!

 

You'll be pleased, I suspect, on multiple fronts.

Venue: Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, Irvine, CA

Order of 1/4 mile finish:

991 911 Turbo S: 10.9secs @ 126.0mph
GT-R Nismo: 11.1 @ 125.3
F-Type R: 11.8 @ 122.3
BMW M4: 12.2 @ 117.8
Camaro Z/28: 12.3 @ 117.2
BMW I8: 12.4 @ 112.1 (Rated at 374HP, BTW)
Alfa 4C: 12.8 @ 104.8
WRX STI: 13.1 @ 104.4
VW GTI: 14.5 @ 97.9
Fiesta ST: 14.9 @ 94.6

The Turbo S and Nismo were the clear winners--from start to finish. Both jumped out in front of the pack off the line, with the 911 in front of the GT-R. Both cars stayed 1-2 throughout the entire race, though the 911 pulls away from the Nismo in the first half, whereas in the last half of the race, the Nismo appears to be gaining slightly on the 911. The R did surprisingly well off the line, just behind the Z/28 at the start, but catching up to it (the Z/28) in the first hundred feet. Interestingly, both the R and Z/28 lagged the I8 just after the start, as the I8 took 3rd position off the line. (12.4 and 6th place for the I8--not bad.) The 4C dug out right behind the Z/28 at the start, but quickly faded to the big boys. The M4 trailed all but the WRX, GTI and Fiesta ST off the line, but quickly caught up. Though the vid doesn't show it very well, the M4 appears to be closing on the R, finishing just a few car lengths behind at the end. (That the R was 4.5mph up on the M4 at the finish is an interesting dynamic. I'd like to see some vids of those two going at each other alone.) There were no "come from behind" performances that I could spot. The finish was pretty much dictated by the start, as we would expect to see in most OEM "heads-up" 1/4 drag races.

 

I have watched a few F-Type runs and monitored the performance and tested out theories of my own with my R.
The Jag takes off rather well for a super powered rear wheel drive car, and is geared very well for the first 3 gears, then it hits fourth gear and we run in to a problem. Fourth is a VERY long gear on the Jag ( or is it third?!? ). Anyway, 3rd or 4th is were other cars catch up to the Jag like the Ferrari 458 and Merc SLS. They end up passing up, we then shift up one more and we are back catching up to those cars, but by then the end is too near and we lose out by a hair. It's too bad about the long gear. At the race track I have felt it and a passenger even commented on the length of that gear. It feels like an eternity before it shifts up.

 

After all this crap I'd still buy the jag above all others:

1- something is wrong with the track time there is no way the R is slower than the convertible

2- a nismo GTR did the 1/4 mile in 11.1 seconds and the F-type R did it in 11.8....0.7 seconds faster than the XKRS!! It's a FAST CAR. The GTR is the standard minus luxury/look. The Jag gives u all 3!!!

3- it's a Jag!! Nuff said

Loth

 

The final drive gear ratios of the R and 458 are considerable. Ferrari keeps things revved up where its high-end power lives. The R in 4th gear has an overall ratio of 4.28 (1.67 (4th) x 2.56 (final)) while the 458 in 4th shows 6.63 (1.29x5.14). Weight differentials of the two notwithstanding.

Hey, we buy the Jag for all kinds of reasons--everyone has their own. While I'm thoroughly enjoying my R, I first look to its performance (as I do with any car I own). Others look at its luxury, styling, the legacy of the Jaguar name, etc. To each their own....

 

Thanks, excellent recap... I really do love our electronic diff; creates rather excellent launches for a rwd car.

 

No problem. Glad to help. I've been in no-download land myself.

 

I am quite disappointed that you guys really care about this contest Motortrend organized.

I mean, come on, I don't even have to comment upon the 1st pick, but really, selecting any 911 over the F-type R is bullocks. Even I have driven for a few days the last model of Carrera 4S, it may be faster but the feeling is totally something else. Also, if you are aiming to get a circuit car get a Ferrari or a Lambo, not a 911. Or the upper versions such as Koenigsegg or a Veyron or whatever.

If you want to drive the best looking car currently on production, with over the top STREET performance, and faboulous heritage, why would you ever drive anything else than an F-Type? Or maybe an Aston... Please explain!!! And stop posting comments on this video, they got paid for this...

 

Duly noted

 

I'm kind of wondering if the F-Type R is over-powered. The V8S seems to perform better (at least based on what I've seen in tests). The F-Type R seems to be a drift king but that may not be ideal in the various performance tests.

One thing I have noticed is that Jaguars in general perform better than their counterparts in day-to-day situations. At least in my cases my S-Type and my XJ8L did better in normal driving situations than their counterparts.

 

You have to keep in mind that there are a whole range of 911s. Some go for like $80,000 (one was in last year's version of this drag race and I think the V8S beat it). But the one in this video is the $200,000 supercar version of the 911 that has a sub 3 second 0-60 and a sub 11 second 1/4 mile.