I have the opportunity to buy a nearly new V6 or wait for one of the new V8 models to become more affordable.

What are your genuine thoughts please?

The V6 is a better sounding engine in my view... any other comments?

 

If you like the sound of the V6, then get a V6. There are mods you can do for power fairly easily if the power output is putting you off..

FWIW, I agree on the sound. I've never been a muscle car fan so I'm not a fan of the V8 sound on the F-Type. I also preferred the center exhaust of the V6.

 

V8! The deep sound, the power, torque,active electronic differential, another world.
I don't like so much the V6 sound at medium low rev.

 

When you mention the new v8, do you mean the 450hp version? If so it is easy to bump a v6 to 450hp.

On sound personally I prefer an 8 though I preferred the old 4.2 to the 5 litre. The 6 does sound awesome though especially being wound up.

I also tend to think that the 6 feels lighter at the front end which I like. Having come from the 5 litre SC in an XKR, I did miss the 8 rumble a little and I missed the quad exhaust a lot. I didnt miss the extra power at all. Fortunately there have been aftermarket bits available so that I now have everything.

 

When I bought my '14 V6S it was considered the sweet spot for the car. I think today most consider the the R as the the top example of the car. The '14 V8S wasn't held up as high.

 

I bought a V6 and after a few months decided to take a loss to trade up to a V8. The torque difference is night and day. In the modern world, the V6 vs the V8 F-Type literally means never winning a race vs never losing a race. If that isn't important to you, then the V6 has plenty of power for day to day driving.

Sound is an individual thing, and IMO the two are actually pretty far apart. The V6 wails, the V8 roars. If you love the sound of a screaming high RPM F1 car, the V6 is the way to go. If high RPM makes you cringe, the V8 is the way to go.

I can't get the equation HP = Torque x RPM out of my head, so when a car needs high RPM, I hear a low torque undersized engine. Other people hear race car, and both of us are right. In racing you want a small, screaming undersized fatally overworked engine that burns-up and dies 1 foot after the finish line. That's not my idea of fun.

Horsepower is not important, you can spin a large engine just as fast as you can spin a small engine and the large engine will always make more power. The difference is, you don't need to. And there-in lies the reason why manufacturers push governments to favor small engines: they do not last as long due to their need to rev to make power.

 

Well I am not here to start any flamewar but simply put this is technically wrong on so many levels that I even don't know where to start - so I won't for sake of peace
But I agree that the sound of V6 and V8 are very different and that V6 screams and V8 roars. The difference is because V6 uses evenly distributed cylinder fires and F-Types V8 uses un-even cross-plane design. I personally don't like the sound of any cross-plane V8 and I am fan only of flat-plane V8s. But of course this is personal.

 

That is really interesting. I really loved the sound of the 4.4 v8 Jag had (or the 4.0 Yamaha volvo used for a while) which gave a rich throbby noise. I dont really like the brassy howl of the 5 litre (had it in 2 cars). Are you able to name a couple of cars that use a flat plane v8? It may be that they have the sound quality I liked.

 

Ferraris use a flat plane crank. Compare that with your basic Camaro.

I thought the V8 F-Type I drove sounded uncouth, while the V6 is more melodic. It's like the difference between a vuvuzela and a french horn.

 

Drive both then you decide. I thought I wanted a V6 until I drove the V8. Then I bought the V8. It’s a beast, which I like. I have no idea what you would like.

 

You’re not saying the Jag v6 IS a flat plane crank, right?
BTW I’d say it’s more like the V6 sounds like an acoustic guitar and the V8 sounds like an electric, cranked up LOUD!

 

The Ford 5.2L in the GT350 is a flat plane crank. I have not heard one but read that the sound is different from normal V-8's?

GT350 5.2L
.
.
.

 

A flat plane setup has a harsher tone and significantly more vibration. Every inline four-banger has it. I personally don't think a less refined set-up suits a luxury Jag. It's the Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde personality the makes the F-Type unlike any other low-3 second car and the evil side is still sexotic.

 

No worries. Obviously "all else equal" comparisons are never all else equal. My point is only that any amount of HP is obtainable from any size engine if you rev it fast enough. E.g. F1 cars generating 800 HP from 1.6L at 18,000 RPM which deliver about 48 hours of design life. Smaller higher RPM engines are one way manufacturers shift the cost of powering the car to the customer. Whether they reflect their savings in the MSRP is for the customer to decide. Being a mathematical person, I want a healthy discount when weighing a proportional relationship (HP= torque x RPM/5252) against an exponential one (Wear = 1/(Red Line/5252)^2. IOWs, revving the engine yields in proportional power and exponential wear. The upside is visceral, the downside is analytical, so it's a popular sales strategy.

 

You can listen to the C8.R's 5.5L flat plane crank live as they run the Rolex 24 at Daytona, about 25 mins after the live stream starts. To me its buzzy and not much like a Corvette.

Several of the cars are streaming, you can click on one at the link below. The C8 camera seems to have quit. The race ends Sunday at 1:30 pm ET.
https://imsatv.imsa.com/

 

Ferrari & Lotus V8s are flat-plane. The sound is part of the mystique. You think that's buzzy?

The commentators on the Daytona race have commented that the racing 'Vettes needed to make sure the added vibration would not decrease reliability. I've driven several V8 Lotus Esprits over the years, and didn't find any unacceptable vibrations in any (not that an Esprit is refined, LOL).

 

Same for me. I was after a V6 until I hit the start button on a 16' R. Personal preference is key here, so check both out.

 

Lots of comments on the sound and power....easy answer is try both.
my point goes to how long a wait to pick up a V8.
one can never recover time wasted.
sort of thinking, buy the best you can,as soon as you can.
cant go wrong with either.

 

True, but you can waste more time regretting a decision, that "investing" more time could result in making the right choice.
Agree that they're all great cars, though (though some are greater than others )!

 

I can see the logic you have behind this, and I partially agree - but there is a bigger picture. It is complicated but if I dare to dumb it down to a forum post:

- RPM = higher wear yes, but it is just some type of wear. If you have low torque engine and want the same HP output, then you are simply stressing some other parts/systems in the engine/car. For example, high RPM is "bad" for pistons (speed) and valves and most likely your piston will hit the valve and kaboom. But if you switch to hi-torque and smaller RPM, that design is highly stressful for engine rods, transmission and gearing in general. So then you will likely bend a rod and guess what, engine kaboom too; or destroy a gearing in a gearbox.

- With big displacement there are disadvantages elsewhere. More mass = more weight = less responsive engine, the car, handling, braking, fuel economy. Bigger engines also have more internal friction forces, so again a bad thing. The centre of mass is usually a problem too (besides mid-engined cars). So even if you have a more reliable engine, the rest is a compromise. Different people have different needs and thus want to accept different compromises to their tastes. For example someone who just want to drag race and smoke other cars on junctions the "go big" is a way; for someone who want to enjoy B-roads the lighness is a way.

- what trully destroys engines are turbos.

- downsizing is not primarly because of a automotive conspiracy, it is because of legal conspiracy and hunt of CO2. In "normal" driving and in test where emissions standrads have to be met, smaller engine producing less CO2 and consume less fuel. And customers want high HP numbers, so there is again some truth in your logic, that small, yet hi powered engines longetivity is not good. I believe automotive industry "doesn't mind" this, but primarly it is to comply with the goverment standards.

- There is an old saying "do not argue with F1 on passanger cars" because it is a different sport (literally). They are building everything for the rules. If you have a rule that you have 3 engines for a season, you will optimalize it that way, every other way is not optimal. In road cars, you have to optimalize for a warranty, safety, emissions etc., so it is just a different problem. Also F1 is on one way massively regulated in what teams can do, so they just must do some things in some ways; but on other hand they are using technologies simply too expensive for a road cars or too high maintanance. For example you have mentioned 18000 rpm F1 engines, thing that is simply impossible in road car, but not that much a problem in F1 since they have pneumatic valve technology.