F-Type ( X152 ) 2014 - Onwards

F Type 2.0L - FAIL or FANTASTIC ?!

Old Dec 7, 2017 | 09:06 AM
  #21  
caviarjag's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 335
Likes: 55
From: Westchester
Default

Originally Posted by sts-v
EVERYONE should be upset at cheaping of the model.
why? If it helps Jaguar sell more cars and, in turn, deliver better future products, who cares? It's not really any cheaper in the US anyway! It's like the people that skewered Porsche for making the boxster and cayenne. Without those cars Porsche wouldn't be a fraction of what it is today. I buy cars because I like them, not for the exclusivity. Regardless, it's not like you are going to see an ftype at every stop light.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 09:25 AM
  #22  
NBCat's Avatar
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,068
Likes: 2,983
From: Newport Beach, California
Default

Automotive manufacturers do not care about anything other than increasing sales volume and dealership profitability.

I think JLR have a good idea with entering other market niches they weren't in before, like the SUVs segments. They seem to want to emulate the Porsche approach to segment diversification.

If the 2.0 litre isn't your cuppa, just stick with the other model and trim levels. As with the XE, JLR want to have an entry-level model to acquire new buyers and expand the customer base for possible future sales.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 09:57 AM
  #23  
sts-v's Avatar
Banned
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 438
Likes: 67
From: Ohio
Default

We're not talking about a new entry level model getting a slow cheap engine, we're talking about the flagship of the brand, which is undoubtedly the F-Type currently. For the same reason why the SVR exists at the top of the flagship line, this is the equivalent of a V4 Corvette or Viper. The V6 in these cars was enough to increase sales, but you are going to lose the exclusivity from R and SVR owners due to the onset of cheap 4 cylinder models.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 10:04 AM
  #24  
carzaddict's Avatar
Veteran Member
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,745
Likes: 206
From: Morristown, NJ
Default

ive had a 2L engine once, never again
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 10:19 AM
  #25  
ek993's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 772
Likes: 183
From: CT
Default

Originally Posted by sts-v
EVERYONE should be upset at cheaping of the model.
It's only cheapening the brand in the eyes of the enthusiasts that care. A very small handful of individuals (the 1%) who frequent Internet car forums. 99% of people don't have a clue as to what size the engine is, how many cylinders, which wheels drive the car.

Putting a 2.0 four banger in the Cayman / Boxster has done nothing to change its image in the eyes of the public as a premium sports car - they would likely put it way above the F Type V6 and V8 variants.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 10:25 AM
  #26  
powerhouse's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Veteran Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,228
Likes: 600
From: Ireland
Default

It all boils down to F-Type owners getting their feathers ruffled seeing a car that has a 2.0 and looks identical, except for engine and exhaust and people not knowing the difference, parked up you would not know the new 2.0 from the V6. Worse again, imagine a V6 owner trying to stay with the 2.0 upstart on a twisty bit of road, not a chance. It corners like it's on rails.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 11:44 AM
  #27  
NBCat's Avatar
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,068
Likes: 2,983
From: Newport Beach, California
Default

Originally Posted by sts-v
We're not talking about a new entry level model getting a slow cheap engine, we're talking about the flagship of the brand, which is undoubtedly the F-Type currently. For the same reason why the SVR exists at the top of the flagship line, this is the equivalent of a V4 Corvette or Viper. The V6 in these cars was enough to increase sales, but you are going to lose the exclusivity from R and SVR owners due to the onset of cheap 4 cylinder models.
Having spent many consulting hours with the manufacturers, I can confidently tell you they are only concerned with sales volume. Having an affordable version of the X152 is very consistent with how they approach marketing and market share. 'Exclusivity' is not something they consider, nor care about. JLR want Jaguar to be a higher volume brand instead of a quirky, niche producer of low-volume sports cars.

As mentioned in an earlier post, the car-buying public know and care very little about anything other than image. Once again, Porsche comes to mind.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 01:10 PM
  #28  
Burt Gummer's Avatar
Veteran Member
5 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,099
Likes: 359
From: Portland OR
Default

A new Miata, with slight mods, would have a much more enjoyable car around the twisties.
Or a Lotus, a Cayman, or many others.

The F-type wasn't meant to be a sewing machine.

The 2.0 JLR offering won't see the performance support of the Mercedes 2.0 and the ease of getting to 450hp and beyond.

All ribbing aside, I am a firm believer in personal taste and choices. If the 2.0 liter rings your bell, more (or less) power to you.

For me, pressing start and hearing the beast come to life is WHY I love the core of the F-type.

You won't see any 2.0 liter offerings from true exotics like Ferrari to pollute their brand.
 

Last edited by Burt Gummer; Dec 7, 2017 at 01:13 PM.
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 01:21 PM
  #29  
Paul_59's Avatar
Banned
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 832
Likes: 328
From: https://t.me/pump_upp
Default

Originally Posted by NBCat
Having spent many consulting hours with the manufacturers, I can confidently tell you they are only concerned with sales volume. Having an affordable version of the X152 is very consistent with how they approach marketing and market share. 'Exclusivity' is not something they consider, nor care about. JLR want Jaguar to be a higher volume brand instead of a quirky, niche producer of low-volume sports cars.

As mentioned in an earlier post, the car-buying public know and care very little about anything other than image. Once again, Porsche comes to mind.
I suspect this is true, sadly!
Always amazes how some marketing execs can allow this dilution of brand value / image to chase sales volume and consequent increased revenue and profits.

I remember when the Boxster came out and indeed the predecessor Porsche 924, the Boxster whatever it's fans believe became widely known as the Porsche for people who wanted a 911 but couldn't afford one.
In a similar vein Mercedes used to be a prestigious brand, the S class was legendary for good reasons, when the A series was introduced it damaged the brand in the eyes of many enthusiasts.
By contrast Toyota had a volume sales brand and understanding marketing rather well created a new brand with Lexus to target the exclusive prestige luxury segment.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 01:26 PM
  #30  
Morgan52's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 135
Likes: 19
From: Brussels area
Default

Originally Posted by Burt Gummer
A new Miata, with slight mods, would have a much more enjoyable car around the twisties.
Or a Lotus, a Cayman, or many others.

The F-type wasn't meant to be a sewing machine.

The 2.0 JLR offering won't see the performance support of the Mercedes 2.0 and the ease of getting to 450hp and beyond.

All ribbing aside, I am a firm believer in personal taste and choices. If the 2.0 liter rings your bell, more (or less) power to you.

For me, pressing start and hearing the beast come to life is WHY I love the core of the F-type.

You won't see any 2.0 liter offerings from true exotics like Ferrari to pollute their brand.
Before you say something you should look it up,Google is my friend just type Ferrari 2.0,I 'll help you :

shut-up-and-listen-to-this-glorious-2-0-liter-ferrari-v-967163546
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 01:53 PM
  #31  
Burt Gummer's Avatar
Veteran Member
5 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 2,099
Likes: 359
From: Portland OR
Default

I stand corrected! Now I say Barf hahaha.

I was referring to the here and now though.

In the 70s my fav car was a Saab Sonnett w/ a 4cyl and 70hp.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 01:56 PM
  #32  
BruceTheQuail's Avatar
Veteran Member
10 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 4,113
Likes: 1,399
From: Gold Coast, Oz
Default

While I love the jag v8, I actually think the v6 suits me better in the f type. It is enormously different to drive on a track. The 4 will be that again, I think. So while Jags have always tended to be overpowered and step out, if there was ever a jag that would benefit from the lighter weight it is the f type.

I'm not upset at all, I reckon it is a great thing. And we wont see a lot more of them. They are not very practical and not as "safe" as a porsche, it isnt as though there is a big market out there for them.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 01:57 PM
  #33  
powerhouse's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Veteran Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,228
Likes: 600
From: Ireland
Default

Can't understand that comment Burt,
A new Miata, with slight mods, would have a much more enjoyable car around the twisties.
Or a Lotus, a Cayman, or many others.
A bit of a contradiction there the F-type is a sports car and driving ability is what it's all about, not much of a car if it can't handle the twisty bits , that's part of what a sports cars about, Driving.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 02:34 PM
  #34  
ek993's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 772
Likes: 183
From: CT
Default

Originally Posted by Paul_59
Always amazes how some marketing execs can allow this dilution of brand value / image to chase sales volume and consequent increased revenue and profits.
Crazy concept that, a company wanting to increase revenue and profits!!

Originally Posted by Paul_59
I remember when the Boxster came out and indeed the predecessor Porsche 924, the Boxster whatever it's fans believe became widely known as the Porsche for people who wanted a 911 but couldn't afford one.
In a similar vein Mercedes used to be a prestigious brand, the S class was legendary for good reasons, when the A series was introduced it damaged the brand in the eyes of many enthusiasts.
By contrast Toyota had a volume sales brand and understanding marketing rather well created a new brand with Lexus to target the exclusive prestige luxury segment.
Porsche would have gone out of business if they didn't diversify from the 911 (or other sports cars). Enthusiasts were up in arms when they produced their first SUV - diluting and devaluing the brand etc. It was an overnight success, became their best selling model by far and enabled them to remain viable as a business - and all these years later - we have fantastic 911 GT3's and GT2's as a result of the brand dilution. Pretty good result I would say.

And as regards Mercedes, I imagine their sales volumes are far far far higher than the days they were concentrating on the low profit margin S class. If their brand is damaged as you say, they don't seem to be suffering for it, infact quite the opposite.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 03:00 PM
  #35  
NBCat's Avatar
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,068
Likes: 2,983
From: Newport Beach, California
Default

That is a great example of a small, niche manufacturer, Porsche, gaining a toe-hold in the SUV segment to increase volume and profitability. If a company is not in business to increase volume and thus profitability, why are they in business in the first place?

Could an electrified X152 be far behind to set JLR at the forefront of that niche?

Perhaps everyone should simply wait to drive the 2.0 litre F-Type prior to passing judgement based on the comments of someone in a YouTube video.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 03:29 PM
  #36  
powerhouse's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Veteran Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,228
Likes: 600
From: Ireland
Default

Originally Posted by NBCat
That is a great example of a small, niche manufacturer, Porsche, gaining a toe-hold in the SUV segment to increase volume and profitability. If a company is not in business to increase volume and thus profitability, why are they in business in the first place?

Could an electrified X152 be far behind to set JLR at the forefront of that niche?

Perhaps everyone should simply wait to drive the 2.0 litre F-Type prior to passing judgement based on the comments of someone in a YouTube video.
Have driven the R the S and the 2.0 and coming from a 500bhp xkr i think the 2.0 is a brilliant car
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 03:31 PM
  #37  
Paul_59's Avatar
Banned
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 832
Likes: 328
From: https://t.me/pump_upp
Default

Originally Posted by ek993
Crazy concept that, a company wanting to increase revenue and profits!!



Porsche would have gone out of business if they didn't diversify from the 911 (or other sports cars). Enthusiasts were up in arms when they produced their first SUV - diluting and devaluing the brand etc. It was an overnight success, became their best selling model by far and enabled them to remain viable as a business - and all these years later - we have fantastic 911 GT3's and GT2's as a result of the brand dilution. Pretty good result I would say.

And as regards Mercedes, I imagine their sales volumes are far far far higher than the days they were concentrating on the low profit margin S class. If their brand is damaged as you say, they don't seem to be suffering for it, infact quite the opposite.
I don't know if the order of my post led to confusion or you just chose to ignore my point,
yes we all know car companies like any other are in business to make profits and typically this comes from high volume even if profit margins are low rather than low volume prestige model.
That said Toyota / Lexus approach to name just one company gets the benefits of both high volume mass market products without dilution of their newer prestige brand Lexus.

As for Porsche having to diversifying from 911, I well remember the 924, 944 and 928 model introduction, these were in case it has been forgotten a new range to replace the 911 which was to be discontinued.
The 924,944 928 went through a couple of iterations before they were discontinued, thirty or so years after the 911 replacements were discontinued the 911 is still the quintessential Porsche whatever you think about their SUVs (or Chelsea tractors as they're called in UK)
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 04:17 PM
  #38  
BruceTheQuail's Avatar
Veteran Member
10 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 4,113
Likes: 1,399
From: Gold Coast, Oz
Default

Originally Posted by powerhouse
Have driven the R the S and the 2.0 and coming from a 500bhp xkr i think the 2.0 is a brilliant car
I havent driven it but I've spoken to a couple of Jag drive instructors who report its awesome.

I'm with you. I'm more concerned about my cubic inches in the bedroom than the garage.
 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 04:37 PM
  #39  
powerhouse's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Veteran Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 2,228
Likes: 600
From: Ireland
Default

 
Reply
Old Dec 7, 2017 | 04:44 PM
  #40  
Queen and Country's Avatar
Veteran Member
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 7,420
Likes: 2,396
From: Hastings
Default

It increases the value- no different that the 2.0 did for Audi
It opens a wider pool of would be buyers (due to fuel consumption- and insurance rates)
Now people actually know Jaguar is still in business and then they find Jaguar makes a supercharged 5l V8.
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:52 PM.