I'd take an LT4 with a Tremec. As you say: what's not to like? No matter. They probably won't be making F-Types when I'm ready for my next car.

 

Don't be suprised if GM moves towards turbos by the too for more efficiency.

 

What make me angry is that turbos are not more fuel efficient than naturally aspirated engines, but they are more efficient when 'bench-tested' by certifying agencies. This is 'legal' version of what VW was doing.

 

Yea, I don't know where all of a sudden turbos became the fuel efficient wave of the future. My turbo 350z was getting around 8-10mpg on average.

 

I'm not sure I follow.
As far as I know, turbocharged engines are fundamentally more efficient than NA engines. This is physically provable as there is less energy leakage in a turbo engine.

I think maybe the confusion is over what is meant by efficiency?
If you take a NA V8 and add a turbo to it, it will be more efficient but yet it will consume the same or more fuel. But the turbocharged engine will produce higher output, so comparing these two engines on fuel economy is comparing apples to oranges.

The more appropriate ways to compare turbo vs NA engines on fuel economy might be:
1. Compare two engines with similar output. The turbo will post higher mpg.
2. Compare two engines with similar overall size or weight (including the turbo). The turbo will post higher mpg.

...or am I missing something?

 

Naturally aspirated engines are on their death bed. JLR is no exception and they have already gone down the same road as other mainstream automakers...

The 5.0L naturally aspirated V8 was replaced by the 3.0L supercharged V6
The 3.0L naturally aspirated V6 was replaced with the 2.0L turbocharged i4

It's been this way for some years now... it's happening to everyone, look at the AMG C63, the BMW M5, Porsche, everyone is having to do the same thing...

The next stage for JLR is replacing their 5.0L supercharged V8 with a BMW derived 4.0L twin-turbo V8.

What's the issue here? Is it because the engines will be BMW-sourced? or because the 4.0L TT V8 does not drive or sound like the 5.0L S/C?

Actually for me personally it's both reasons...

 

For me its both reasons as well.. Jaguar, over the years has produced some fine engines and assuming they will only sell a smallish number of v-8 over the next 10 years it may not make sense to the 'bean counters', but to the car guys, it should make sense to produce a v-8 that is basically a Jaguar engine, supercharged and sounding great.,, even if the efficiency is down a bit, the number of them would be small in comparison to the total fleet, assuming they restrict it to the R only.

Even though the current v-8 apparently has Ford blood in it, Jaguar and Ford had been 'one' at the time and so it is still their engine.
Lawrence

 

+1@Cambo, Mulmur

 

If it was made by BMW with Jaguar's design I'd feel better than just sourcing their engine.

And after driving an S6, a C63S and an GS-F on Wednesday, NOTHING drives like my XFR. Might have to do the ultimate sin and keep mine after the extended warranty runs out.

 

While I'll miss the off idle rowdy-ness of the blower car and the amazing sounds it makes. When they drop a TT V8 in the F-type, I'll be first in line.

 

Did Jag actually have a press release on this new engine or is it just bloggers. I'd believe the former but not so much the latter.

Turbos will always hit the cars sound track adversely (e.g. Porsche's new all turbo line up). Honest manufacturers will not use the cars sound system to correct the issue, but honesty is a rapidly vanishing quality.

The alternative is loosing weight, but that also means getting rid of the motorized gadgets (e.g., Alfa Romeo 4C...that's what I call a spartan interior). You can get by with small displacement when you go on a diet.