Almost as fast?.....ummmm no. There's a 2 second advantage 0-60 for the V8 compared to the 4 cyl.

I don't have any issues with the 4cyl F type and wouldn't critize anyone for buying one.....but don't delude yourself, the difference in speed and power is massive.

Dave

 

Dave, what I aim at is that in a major part of the USA its not legal to go much faster then 60 anyway. And yes ; in a straight line V6&V8 will be faster.
But in a country / mountain road setting, its not just brute force that rules. Many reviewers already commented its more nimble and fun to drive.

But my main issue is ; can you put the advantage/force on the tarmac without wild corrections by electronic systems or burning out tires...
This can only be road tested..
Maybe a dealer with both engine types on sale ???

 

Agree, nothing wrong with getting a 4 cylinder, it's the future. And I'm sure you could design a course with nothing but tight twisties where the 4 cylinder car may excel, and be even with or perhaps even beat the 6 cylinder and 8 cylinder models.

But I've modified cars that started with 300 and 400 hp and taken them to 600hp, and well, I'd bet 9 out of 10 people that drove them before and after would prefer the higher horsepower variant.

Just curious, do we have a real world weigh in on the 4 cylinder model? (Jaguar's published stats are very misleading).

 

I'm not knocking the car, just pointing out that there is no comparison in power and speed - whether it's in a straight line OR on a track. I'm sure the F type 2.0 is nimble and fun to drive and I don't think there is anything wrong with that....just don't try to challenge a V6 or V8 F type to any type of speed contest as the 4cyl will lose badly.

A Honda Civic can break the speed limit anywhere in North America but people still want the power and acceleration offered by V8 F types, R8's, 'vettes, Vipers and a plethora of other powerful cars.

Yes, I often use the full power of my V8 even without the electronic aids and yes, the tires tend to wear out more quickly than they would with less hp....but I'm OK with that.

Cheers,
Dave

 

- its not about the power, its about the weight and drive characteristics ;
- Dutch government site gives as a real weight for a 2L coupe 1588Kg;
Also a coupe, but V8 SVR they publish 1754Kg;

Difference of 166Kg " ON-THE-NOSE " ...

 

Dave, acutally thats EXACTLY what I suggest.. ... in a straight line to start with. As I seriously do not believe that under normal road conditions all that power
can be used for propulsion of the car . Then I do not mean dragstrip setup or such, or 15 minutes editing all the settings of driving and handling.

No, just drive up to the next guy at a traffic light in normal road settings and take it from there...

 

 

I remember back in 1991 when I got my Nissan 300xz Twin Turbo with 300 horsepower, seemed like a lot back then.

For us USA guys, 1588 is 3500 lbs. 2wd V-8R's weigh in at 3850. Humn, I'm gonna put my money on 605 HP and an extra 350 lbs vs. 297 HP.

 

From my own experience, I had the 5.0 XF which was supposed to be 0 - 100kph in about 5.5 from memory then I got the XKR 5.0SC which was supposed to be about 4.5 for the 0 - 100kph, now I have the 6 cyl f type which is supposed to be about 4.7. The XKR felt enormously faster than the XF, as you'd expect. Like the difference between brisk and scary, but struggled with traction.

Due to the better rear suspension and less power in the 6 cyl F type, it is quicker in real life than the XKR was which I could never launch properly without losing traction and the dts cutting power, so I think that is getting a genuine time under 5 seconds whereas the XKR couldnt.

The RWD F Type R has the better suspension so it doesnt have as much issue with traction, the AWD F type R has no real traction issues at all so despite the extra weight it is getting pretty close to 4.0 flat.

the 4 potter f type is still a quick car - anything under 6 seconds feels pretty fast - but there is a huge and palpable difference between 5.5 and 4.5, or even 5 and 4.5.

 

I'm thinking you haven't had much experience with fast cars - no insult intended.

The 2.0 hasn't been out long so there isn't a bunch of 0-60 tests but Jaguar says it does it in 5.4 seconds......the V8 variants do it in 3.4 - 3.6 seconds. It doesn't take any special fiddling or "dragstrip setup". I'm telling you that there is zero chance that by the time 60mph rolled around that the 4 cylinder F type would be in same time zone as the V8.

sorry but your belief is just wrong in this case.

Dave

 

1) don't put too much stock in the advertised weights of these cars

2) 3500 lbs divided by 295hp = 11.87 lbs per hp for the 2.0
3859 lbs divided by 575hp = 6.72 lbs per hp for the SVR

As those numbers suggest, the 2.0 has zero chance in any speed related contest and while the weight difference helps handling of the 4cyl car it's nowhere near enough to make up for the massive hp difference on the street or track.

Dave

 

Agreed on the huge difference between even a second in 0-60 but even the RWD variants of the V8 F type can easily do 0-60 under 4 seconds.



Dave

 

Nothing on the 4cyl yet here; https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicl...-60-mph-times/

but you can see that even the lowest hp V8 has a listed 0-60 of 3.9 seconds (fastest shown is the P7 at 3.3 proving that RWD isn't as big a problem as some would believe). 340hp V6 = 5.0 seconds, 380hp V6S = 4.7 seconds.

As suggested earlier in the thread, there's lots of data out there so this isn't any big mystery.

Dave

 

But, but, but the traction. Rubber tires cannot possibly handle more power than a 300hp 4 pot can muster....

 

LOL, no kidding!

When people start talking about traction issues, I typically point them to the F.A.S.T. drag race series (Factory Appearing Stock Tire). These cars are doing 10 second 1/4 mile times with over 800hp......on F60-15 bias ply tires!


Impressive, isn't it!

Dave

 

Whaaaat? A fast car without 4-wheel drive? No Nannies? That can't be...

 

Yeah, I know Dave; his car is pushing 804hp last time I checked, zero electronic aids, and a biased ply tire that is less that 10" wide.....you do, however, need to know how to drive. ;-)


Dave

 

It is incorrect to say a major part of the USA has limits of 60MPH or less. Much of my driving is on Texas roads that are posted at 70 and 75MPH, with some on roads with an 80 or 85MPH posted limit.

Roads in other parts of the country are similar. The only part of my drive that is routinely in a posted 60MPH is inside the actual city limits of places like Houston.

Out in West Texas, with the posted 80MPH, one can easily run over 90MPH and not be stopped. The ability to dispose of a speeding ticket with a defensive driving course is lost if one is cited for more than 25MH over the posted limit OR is traveling in excess of 100MPH. The toll roads around Austin have a posted 85MPH and I actually do not recall ever having seen an agency running traffic radar, even near the exits for Circuit of the Americas (where I have to figure they could rack up a whole lot of tickets without much effort).

There are also plenty of occasions where the shear brute force of the V6 or the V8 is preferable to a four-pot.

 

 

It's snowing right now so it's the only racing I can do! LOL

Dave