The English do poor reliability with style haha!

Don't feel bad, English Cars have earned a reputation for poor reliability, but at least the owner can sit back in quality Connolly Leather and admire the stitching as they sit at the side of the road waiting for the flat bed to arrive.

Shoot, now I feel bad too.

 

Well, since the F-Type is primarily a German car, with a Ford-designed engine what's the problem?

 

That's right. And both were of course owned by Ford until a few years ago. I'm pretty sure the engines in both the AMV8 and our Jags share a common lineage, albeit ours has forced induction.

 

This is a simple choice. Jump in the r and flip into dynamic mode and stomp on the gas.
Your choice will be made. I was looking at the r8 before I got my jag R. The Austin does not even compare at all to the jag r. For me austin did not even make final cut. It was jag r Porsche turbo or r8. R won

 

I drove them both back to back. For me it wasn't so much about zero to 60 times, a screaming exhaust with computerized backfires. And screaming around racing other drivers on the freeway and city streets.

The Aston is a beautiful driving, sounding and looking car. I plan on keeping for a long time, and for me it's nice to have a car which will depreciate at about half the rate of the Jaguar. Aston has built around 20,000 v8v world wide in the last 10 years, where as Jaguar will probably build about that many per year worldwide. So while neither is rare, the Vantage is less common.

So for me the Aston was a better choice.

 

Look at the Nissan GTR, it can stomp all over any of these cars. But my god it's a sows ear to look at, and I bet most F Type buyers would never even consider it.

 

Agreed, they are beautiful and its a great badge. Having owned a Vantage I can tell you that in my experience of sports car ownership (Aston,Porsche,Ferrari,Lotus,TVR) the F-Type is a superior machine, perhaps not a superior badge but its a superior car to drive for many reasons, and I love to drive manual cars. If Manual was the main reason there are better choices to be made such as the Cayman GT4. Regarding depreciation what stats are you basing your comments on? I think you are a bit delusional. British cars including Astons depreciate like hell here in California. I can pick up a myriad of Vantage at my local Porsche and other dealerships for nothing. In fact I went to buy a new SUV a few months ago and was offered a Rapide S (V12) with 9k on the clock for $90k. I think they are $250k new.

 

Not this one. I considered a GTR and I have driven one. But yes it doesn't have the aesthetic appeal nor the drama and flair of the V8 F-Type.

 

Congrats on your car, SoCal; I love the car and would love to own one, but I couldn't live with the 2007 model that I drove. (See my earlier post.) I have not driven a new one, but would like to, just to see what they've improved in 8+ years.

As for the depreciation factor, the local dealer has a new 2014 Vantage S Base coupe with the 7-speed automatic, MSRP $142,175, and is asking $104,999 for it. I'm sure it could be had for under $100K.

 

I agree they all depreciate too fast, and mileage is a big factor, these cars don't hold their value well if they are high mileage. As for the F type, it's hard to say since the car is so new.

But if you look a used XKR compared to the same year V8V, comparably priced when new, the Jaguar is worth half as much as the Aston.

 

I suspect you are mostly correct on this point. For the 2007 AM Vantage V8 that I drove with 29,000 miles, the dealer was asking $58K about a year ago, and I imagine I could have negotiated a discount of say $5K on that one. I assume this was a representative price for that car with low miles. Checking cars.com, I found 450, XK/XKR's available. I pretty sure you can find a decent 2007 XK/XKR for less than $30K today, for what that's worth.

 

From that example you are talking about a roughly $25k difference in depreciation over ten years. While $2-3k a year isn't a negligible amount of money, I'd say that if it's enough to be a large difference maker that a new $70-120k car may not be an optimal choice anyway.

 

Not quite sure, but I think in laymans terms your saying is. You buy a $100k+/- automobile because it's what you want, never a good investment, but f**k your only here once, enjoy yourself.

 

Yep, for sure. Thank you for translating my robot speech into human.

 

beautiful car for sure, but just dated at this point. i had considered a audi R8 before buying the R as well, but couldn't get over the 'dated' aspects of the car (even though i loved the look).

bought the jag and have never regretted it...

 

That's funny I was test driving an r8 when a guy passed me at least doing 150mph after that dropped r8 back off went and got the jag r. I also felt the r8 was super dated. You spend almost 100 k for a 2010 with a slow v8 that can't hang with the R

 

SoCal, So have you bought or ordered your car? Where can we read your impressions of it after you've put some miles on it?

 

I test drove an R8 V10 vert a year ago. Really nice car. But more expensive than I could reasonably expect my wife to be OK with. New ones are supposed to out in 2017, so I decided to wait until used 17/18s were available.

Having now bought an F, thoughts of an R8 have completely vanished. The Jag is way more car for the money.

 

I have purchased it, it hasn't arrived yet. I will post photo when I receive which should be fairly soon.

 

Just saw this thread. SoCal, congrats on the purchase. I'm on my second Jag and my third Aston, which hopefully permits me to speak from a relatively unbiased perspective. I love both marques, but believe me, you will not regret your decision.

This thread contains the usual range of opinions, some of which are balanced and acknowledge that both cars have their strengths, and many of which contain predictable fanboy reasoning.

I wouldn't call the Aston technically inferior, nor would I say the Jag is a whole lot more car, or performance, for the money. I guess it's all in how you define 'technical' and 'performance'. If it's only about raw numbers, hp figures, acceleration, ability to do burnouts/oversteer etc. then the Jag may 'win' but both it and the Aston are suboptimal value for the price. From an engine perspective they are very different cars; the Aston has a lot less low end torque and requires a lot more work to extract acceleration For the average driver in an urban or straight road environment, it will feel a lot slower than it is. On a track the V8 Astons punch well above their weight, in my experience, and are superbly balanced cars. They suffer little of the excess torque over grip that upsets RWD F types (and the V12 Astons), and are substantially lighter and more neutral than the AWD F types and V12 Astons.

But for me, it has very little to do with numbers. It has much more to do with the irrational aspect of spending any more money than necessary on a car, beyond an ability to go from A to B. The Aston is in a COMPLETELY different league from the Jag in this area. I guess it all depends on how important aesthetics and the 'feel' of a car are to each buyer. You don't have to look very far in any Jag to see numerous, unpleasant reminders of cost-cutting and mass production: cheap plastics, pseudo materials (painted surfaces etc.), ugly engine bay and so on. Even though no car is immune to being built to a price, there are very few of these reminders in any Aston, compared to most others. And although the design of the Jag is beautiful, it is just not as well resolved, timeless and precious looking as the Aston, inside or out.