Jaguar F-type V6 S manual (2015) review by CAR Magazine

 

How's it possible the manual gets 5 mpg worse gas mileage...?

 

I didn't think the 2015 had a manual. Does he mean the 2016 manual or did the UK 2015 model have a manual?

 

Maybe it just needs a new (short?) shifter upgrade? There are several for the BMWs (will they fit?).

EVO3 Ultimate Short Shifter for E30/E36/E46 318, 320, 323, 325 (all models except iX/Xi) ? UUC Motorwerks Online Store

 

Now that's surprising.

 

I'd also like to know how a manual transmission cuts almost a second out of the zero to sixty time... But generally I tend not to take articles too seriously when they can't even get the model year right.

 

You're right, there was no 2015 manual anywhere.

It's either a typo or misunderstanding by the mag. However, it is rather bizarre to be introducing 2016 models, when 2015 has barely begun. For whatever reasons, they've convinced themselves that being 6 months ahead of everyone else provides some sort of advantage.

 

They also say they adjusted the center console to suit the manual transmission and give you arm space, but from my experience in the show car it was still very intrusive and uncomfortable. It was an awkward position for me to shift, having to raise my shoulder slightly.

 

I think it ADDs 0.4 seconds 0-60 compared to the auto - computers shift better than humans.

 

That article had close to zero credibility as far as I'm concerned. I'm not doubting the numbers produced by the writer/driver, but I do question the skill level.

The perspective was decidedly off as indicated by the seemingly befuddled observation, "traditionally manuals are quicker [than automatics]" . . . , and if you place the emphasis on traditional, that was true. However, it should have also been noted that contest flipped about a decade ago, as automatic technology (including DCTs) became continually more sophisticated with computers making much faster inputs than humans are capable of.

Lastly, who cares? For certain "purists," it will be more fun!!!!!

 

Fewer gears. Same is true with BMW and other brands.

 

I don't believe JLR has officially said anything about fuel economy for the manual other than TBD. However, a couple of the car spec sites are quoting for the S 29, 32, and 33 mpg for the Manual, AWD and RWD auto, respectively.
The cutoffs for the model years appear to be different for different markets. Perhaps the manual is a late 2015 model year appearance for the UK. Our UK members might be able to shed some light.
I've never met an OEM shifter that was short enough and have shortened them on all my cars with kits or custom fabbed linkages. I'll be doing so on this one.
Since you only have 6 gear ratios instead of 8 plus a torque converter to optimize engine speed for maximum torque, it's easy to understand why the manuals are 0.4 seconds slower to 60mph. In past eras, the automatics were far less efficient and usually had fewer gear ratios than their manual counterparts.

 

I ran my own admittedly, unscientific test comparing mpg in automatic mode, vs. sport with paddle-only shifting. On two successive fill-ups, I reset the mpg computer, driving exclusively in auto the first time, and then on the next fill-up, exclusively in sport mode using only paddles. I drove the same route on both tests to and from work, which was 70% highway and 30% city.

Using paddles my I came out at 25+ mpg in automatic mode, and about 22.5 mpg using the paddles only. The obvious conclusion is that the automatic is very aggressive in keeping rpms to a minimum until you stand on the throttle, whereas when driving in manual mode, one has a tendency to keep the revs considerably higher.

Interestingly that's about the same 5mpg difference in the "Car Magazine" test.

 

+1.
Here was the choice for me:
Automatic: 0-60 in 3.not much, lightning fast and precise shifts
Manual: 0-60 in 5.3or4, rubbery, notchy and long throws
Clear choice for me, no hesitation. (...and I have a room waiting for me at the looney bin)

 

In the UK its still a 2015 model. It's a US thing to label it a 2016 model at the beginning of 2015.

MPG and acceleration differences are all down to the transmission.

If manual transmission is your thing you won't be satisfied with an auto so even if subjectively one reviewer prefers the auto I am sure the manual is still an excellent car. It's all down to personal preference and degrees of excellence.

Car magazine is very well respected and it's unusual for a UK publication to favor an auto over manual. They are very much pro manual and anti auto culturally over there.

 

It's probably worth noting that here in Good Old Blighty, Model Years follow Calendar Years.

Although - strictly speaking - we don't have the concept of Model Years. It all comes down to the year in which the car was first registered.

HTH...

 

It may be a "US thing" for Jaguar, but it isn't for any other foreign or domestic manufacturer in the US.

 

Thanks to our UK members for chiming in, I was going to post that the UK typically doesn't treat model years as we do in the U.S. (and the crazy way we seem to get "next year's" models early in the calendar year).

As others have said, Car is an excellent mag and Ben Barry is a good reviewer. I get it every month along with Evo.

Bottom line though is it's great that we have one of the few cars in the class available with a manual and the choice between that or the excellent ZF 8 speed. I miss the manual in my 911 from time to time but I'm very happy with the ZF. I'm certainly looking forward to taking a test drive in the manual F Type at some point.

 

I am not going for the fastest or most fuel efficient. I am buying the ability to enjoy an F-Type with interaction between throttle, clutch and gearbox. As long as it's reasonably fun to drive and has decent thrust, I will be quite happy.

 

Personally, and regardless of the source, I would wait and form my own opinion(s) only after driving any car (preferably and if possible, beyond just a few minute test drive; although much - certainly not all - can be determined and discerned rather quickly). I read the review and while you Lance aren't "worried" or "concerned" - nor might anyone else who ordered the MT - unless it was universally panned (to use your word, and even then I would reserve judgment), I wouldn't be. Worried or concerned that is. Opinions are a dime a dozen. We shall see...to be continued.