The V6S has a 130 hp and 121 ft. lb deficit compared to the XKR, although it is also 300 lbs lighter. Still, on a long track with some good straights, it is not clear to me the V6S would dominate a stock XKR. At least on paper.

 

Scott

Quick question: A couple of posts stated that the new cars with the ECO feature now have 2 starting batteries, one just for the frequent starts.

Does the F-type has the ECO, Start-Stop feature? Can you confirm the two batteries? Are they similar in size? Wonder if you can jettison one for an easy 40 lbs weight savings?

Good to see you lap times comparisons. I fully agree with your predictions when using an R compound tire. In one of those model comparison tests, a year back or so, the XKR was several seconds off the pace from the other cars. Hopefully the F-type will close that gap.

Albert

 

Bruce,

I was under the same impression, until i saw them both take off at the Jaguar driving event.

V6S was just as quick.

Then i drove them both the V6S and the V8S. They both felt a lot lighter around the corners.....where the XKR felt soft and heavy.

Not putting down the XKR in any way, i actually prefer the XKR. But the F type is very well engineered for spirited/track driving.

 

Just wondering if anyone's seen a comparison of the F-type against a more track-ready XKR, i.e R-S or Dynamic Pack? The F-type should still have the edge on track, but just curious if the gap is much smaller.

 

Bet you didn't know this about the F-type.

Jaguar's New Convertible Has A Pyrotechnic Popping Hood To Keep Pedestrians Alive - Yahoo! Finance

Albert

 

Well, yeah, the XK has it, so I assumed the F-type does - basically allows you to have a low hood profile & still meet EU regulations mandating a specific gap between hood & engine so that pedestrians don't hit the hard, unyielding bits.

 

Not many X150 owners know that their XK has it either. Nor do they realize that their car actually pioneered this feature!

 

2014 Jaguar F-Type V8 S First Test - Motor Trend

Impressive performance but, very disappointing weight. At its measured 3965 lbs. it is about 300 lbs heavier than the factory claims. Very close to what the XKRs or the V8 XJs weight. I really want to like the F-type but, are having a very hard time with the weight issue.

In comparison, here is the MT's first test of the 2014 Vette. After reading both, my bet is still on the base Vette on a race track, such as Laguna Seca. I am sure soon we shall see that very comparison test.

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...t/viewall.html

Albert

 

I think we're struggling with the F-Types identity a bit. The Jaguar faithful are drawn by the brand's elegance and seductive designs. Those that wanted those things in a sports version found it in the XK, and high performance in the XKR/S models. The F-Type is a bit hard to understand from that perspective because it isn't as elegant, and can't be used as generally because of it's lack of space.

From a performance standpoint the top model uses the same engine, but with less power, and still seems awfully heavy despite its tighter size. Reviewers don't test it objectively against the XKR, but subjectively say it's more sporty. I know more about how it compares to the new Stingray and Porsche that I've never seen than to the car Jaguar hopes I'll trade-in, but it seems to be the same technology as what I have, and less than what the other new cars offer.

I think the F-Type's place in the line-up will make a lot more sense to some of us once the current XK Series is redesigned into a larger car. The F-Type will then be the only sporty Jaguar, and it won't be compared to the XK's where I suspect the verdict is very much split at the moment based on individuals preferences for performance, style and daily utility.

Bruce

 

Any idea what the Motortrend weighed the XKR (convertible) in at?

 

I'm not struggling with the car's identity at all. It's a sports car/race car. It's faster than the XKR with the same driver and the same track even though the XKR has better track tires. It's got two seats, it's loud, it's fast, yet it's relatively comfortable given its performance on the track. Jaguar's motto has always been grace - pace - space. This car fits in nicely with all three but heavy on the PACE

 

I hear you Scott but, my feelings after sleeping on the bad weight news is that I will not be owning an F-type. As a long time racer it is in my blood to seek out light weight sports cars. I go to near extremes to shed weight from my cars and they do reward me for that with magnificent performance.

The F-type is simply too fat for me, so much so that there is no way to reasonably get it down to an (for me) acceptable weight range. Compare 4000 lbs to my 500 HP twin turbo RX-7 that weights 2600 lbs and the difference is screaming at you both in numbers and on the track.

Too bad, I really wanted to like the F-type. Still wish Jaguar success with the model as very few people are so adamant about light weight as I am.

Albert

 

Albert, you are not alone. But I distinguish between a more or less dedicated track car and a dual-purpose machine. A 4000 pound two seat convertible dedicated track car goes against every instinct I have--for the track, "simplify, then add lightness", as Colin Chapman once famously said.

But the V8S as Scott and others describe it is a car that will acquit itself very well on the track, and then take you and a companion to dinner in fine style, without offending any tender-arsed sensibilities .

My 500+hp, 2900 lb 930 can do both, but it is so clearly a fish out of water for the latter task it's almost wince-able. It looks cool doing it, and the valets dig it (although watching them try to modulate its clutch can be painful, so I usually just ask them to let me park it), but it just doesn't belong there. The track or at least high speed canyon carving is where it belongs. The XKR, on the other hand, is ideally suited for the canyon and dinner

 

I was disappointed when I first read that the F-Type was 3600-3900 lbs, and that it was also going to be priced upwards of $70-90k. I was hoping for something that would've been more of a Boxster-fighter than a 911 fighter. I think this is probably the direction that sports cars will go in the future. Lighter weight, more of a focus on the driving experience rather than on brute numbers. Plus I think many of these high performance cars have already maxed out their potential for what's physically possible (and safe) to use on the street.

Not to mention eco-friendliness. And don't tell me eco-friendliness doesn't matter with luxury cars. Jaguar is putting in turbo I-4s on their entry level offerings already.

I'm still hopeful that Jaguar will put out a Boxster competitor in the future, but I haven't heard anything about one so I think it will probably be a long time waiting for one!

 

Bruce

Understand your points. Still, I do not like to be blown off the race track, or in a street encounter, by much less expensive cars, such as the Vette, which SHOULD lap quite a bit quicker than the F-type, judging from the power-to-weight ratios and given the huge, 500 lbs, weight advantage.

Sure, it might be unfair to compare the F-type to my or your modified street racer but, you can directly compare it to the stock base or future upper-end Vettes which, by all accounts have beautiful street ride qualities for taking your gal to dinner AND killer track performance. So, you can have your cake and eat it too but, probably not in the F-type. It is hard to justify a 4000 lbs car as a sports car.

In all honesty, I have difficulty even with the added 100 lbs in weight of the new Vette following the change from steel to aluminum construction.

Albert

 

I don't know why, but i am having hard time believing these publications regarding F types weight.

I have driven all three - V6S, V8S and XKR. Both F types, especially the V6, felt much lighter than the XKR. Don't know by how much,but i would say at least 200-300lbs.

To make an analogy, it's like driving XF/XJ or any sedan for that matter, alone vs full car. I am sure you all know of the extra load in the car with passengers and how it affects it's acceleration and the handling.

That's the difference i felt carving corners in both models.

 

Would it help at all to think of it as a 4000 lb 2 seater luxury sports/GT/muscle car that's also a pretty capable occasional track day car?

 

Yes........agreed....................

I am currently considering a Porsche Cayman S to add to my fleet of cars and park next to my XKR Convertible.

Honestly, I prefer the Porsche Cayman S over the F-Type, although the Cayman S is a coupe. Price wise, the Porsche is about $20,000 to $25,000 lower in price, and that's a loaded Porsche Cayman S with lots of options. The Porsche Cayman S weighs in at about 2960 pounds as curb weight according to the Porsche specs.

WEIGHTS F-TYPE F-TYPE S F-TYPE V8 S
Curb weight #1 3,521 lb. 3,558 lb. 3,671 lb.
Gross vehicle weight 4,464 lb. 4,464 lb. 4,464 lb.
#1 Weight reflects vehicles to standard specifications. Optional features may increase weight.

 

Executive; what you feel is NOT necessarily the weight difference BUT, the difference between a more neutral, more precise suspension setup vs. one with a less ideal setup with more understeer and more body-roll. Also the steering feel. The XKR does not have a very good steering feel vs. the F-type that is, by all indications, better. That is my personal opinion after driving my XK, as well as the opinions of the pro testers, below. A well setup car that weights a lot more can "feel" a lot better than a lighter car that is not set up well. Still, at the end, the weight penalty will show up in the performance measurements.

2012 Motor Trend Best Driver's Car - Motor Trend


Bruce; I'm sure that I could have tons of fun in the F-type. But, my competitive nature would have a hard time to deal with knowing that lesser cars could outrun my pride and joy. I had always pushed my street cars to the limit on the streets and on the tracks and I like to know that such limits in my $100K+ supercar are high enough to keep the hordes of Mustangs and Camaros at bay. With 4000 lbs, I am not confident that to be the case. Let's wait for this year Motor Trend comparison test, such as the one I posted above. If the F-type is "only" 2 or 3 seconds/lap quicker than the XKR-s, it will still be behind those ponycars, not to mention the new Vette.

Albert

 

Motor Trend sure does love that rear-engined 911, doesn't it?