axr6,
If you check a majority of the boxes on the options list of a Boxter or Cayman S, you will cross the $100,000 barrier with plenty of room to spare, in fact, encroach upon the 911 Cabriolet price territory. When you've checked all of those boxes you get a car equipped similarly to an F-type costing substantially less in V-6S form, and somewhat less than in V-8s form. So, you're right, there's the possibility of buying a stripped, base engined, Porsche for less, but those are no frills cars. I don't believe Jaguar wanted the F-type to be the entry level Jaguar.

As for the F-type killing off the XK, has the Z-4 killed off BMW's 6 series, has the SLK killed off the the Mercedes 550SL, has the Audi TT killed off the 5 series Audis? Of course not, in each case they are two different cars aimed at two different buyers. In Jaguar's case, because it's such a small company, the XK had to do double duty as sports car and GT as there wasn't money for development of a low volume 2 seater sports car. I think TaTa's infusion of money will result in an enhanced model lineup (more models) as well as continued development and upgrading to bring Jaguar back to the world class status it has enjoyed in the past. The F-type is new, a bit raw, but I'll bet two to three years from now, it will compete with anything in its class and some outside of it.

 

Not trying to hijack the thread, but it seems that if Jag wants to sell more cars they are gonna have to spend more marketing money on telling people that they build reliable cars, or if a customer has a problem they stand behind their product.

The first thing out of many peoples mouths when I tell them I drive a Jag is, "so it's in the shop being fixed"...

Jaguar has improved tremendously over the years and I am sure the F Type will build on their brand but if they intend to expand beyond their boutique presence in the auto market (they only sell ~50K cars a year world wide). Mercedes, BMW, and the other domestic car producers blow them away in numbers. Land Rover sells around 300K vehicles a year (world wide).

And with higher priced cars come the expectations for higher performance, reliability and customer service.

So when the F Type comes out of the gate it really needs to be a well built and functional car that performs at a high level. I would even say that reliability may be more important for Jaguar than being able to beat a 911 on the track.

 

Hey amcdonald86! we seem to have followed a similar path (if I'm reading you right and you also owned an RX-8). I bought one of the first models in 2003 sight unseen and waited 6 months for it, hence my SHARX8 tag which has also been my license plate for 10 years. It reminds me of my roots (lol)

Loved that car for 7 years, it's looks, rotary sound, uniqueness, 4 seater capability and the handling was superb... it just lacked in Power. When I got dusted by an angry soccer mom driving an old Intrepid, it was time for her to go.

So I moved up to an MB E550 which satisfied the power lust but did not deliver on handling and was quite literally putting me to sleep on the commute home. Two weeks ago I swapped it for a 2012 XK-R Vert... and just like Goldilocks, I think I found my porridge...

 

I completely agree with all your points and that the improved reliability ratings need to be front and center in the eye of the consumer. I've learned from working with automakers directly on the marketing side (including JLR) that they have to be very careful when citing independent studies. The appearance that they have somehow sponsored the ratings could backfire on them. They much prefer this type of publicity to appear solely in editorial content so as not to cast any doubt over the veracity and honesty of the findings. Of course they love to see viral and word of mouth activity which I guess is what we are doing right now!

 

Jaguar can sell their cars as automobiles to keep for the long haul. This infers some type of reliablility and just about all the manufacturers are avoiding this strategy. Jaguar is a niche brand and there's plenty of older models on the road to have consumers "connect the dots" as they see the older cars on the road and equate Jaguar as "a car to keep".

The notion that Jaguar is building investment worthy cars with a timeless image plays toward reliability without fluffing the facts or seeming staged.

 

Agreed 100%. One of the major reasons I felt ok with going with the XK was the free maintenance included with the 2011 model year. I bought my car to use as my primary vehicle (12 - 14k miles / year or so), and with it being the first car of this level I've bought, I was somewhat nervous about cost of ownership.

Its funny though, I've got just a hair over 15k on it now... and I don't even think about it anymore. Its a good car, its okay to just drive it. I take care of it, as I would anything else, but its not like it requires anything above and beyond any other vehicle. When I was shopping, I felt like going with Jaguar was probably a bigger "risk" than the other major luxury brands, but outside of the more expansive dealer network of MB / BMW / etc. I no longer believe that to be true. My reservations, I think, were mainly due to my unfamiliarity with the brand.

 

I never actually owned an RX-8. I had test driven several, and lusted after one for a long time. However, I had my start in enthusiast car ownership with a '94 Mazda Miata, which is in the same spirit as the RX-8. That car was a blast!

 

SO I went to the F Type event in Atlanta last night. There was a pretty good turnout...there were Ferrari's, Lambo's, and lots of Jags. I think there were some Falcons players there.

The F Type they presented had the V6. It was "Firesand" (a variation of orange) in color which I really liked (I understand this is a subjective thing).

I sat in it...it felt very similar to my XKR...controls looked to be laid out well...was not able to explore the electronics. Seats are constructed very similarly to those in the XKR-S.
Seat controls on the side of the door like the XKR, rocker switches for Dynamic mode and other selections. They have incorporated the same infotainment headunit that is in the XJL. The interior was all black, but some variations are available. Tires are big...295/20 20's on the back. Very clean engine bay like the other jags with a cover so not much else readily visible there.

The sales guy that will be helping me with a test drive later next month said I could get a fully loaded V8 S for about $104K.

What I notice about the front styling which is somewhat lost in some of the pictures is how the "gills" are angled and slanted. After seeing it in person it is more agreeable. At least I no longer think it is an S2000 front end.

Jaguar Gwinnett is supposed to get a few in stock in a few weeks, and I will be test driving when they come in. I would only be interested in the V8 Supercharged version myself. They also confirmed that the XK/R is getting bigger and will have larger back seats. They weren't sure if that would happen with 2014 model, but was sure it would be here by 2015 model year. Wonder what that will do to our XK/R's now? I personally don't want a larger XKR - I like mine the way it is (size).

Next question I have will only be answered by time, and that is how much will the F Type depreciate? I am thinking they will depreciate $20K the first year...if they have lots of build problems or issues it may be more.

At the size the F Type is now it would be a good convertible car between the XKR and the XJL...at least for me!

 

Is that a typo on the tire size? 295/20 would only have a 59 mm tall sidewall! That would be an open invitation for wheel damage nearly every time you hit a pavement irregularity.

Thanks for the great write up. I can't wait to see and experience the F myself.

Albert

 

I may be off there on my memory...I know they were 295's - they may have been 295/30's...

 

I have learned not to buy the first year of any new car the hard way. Jaguar has a hard time with them. When the XK8 first came to the U.S. in 1997, I waited a couple of years and bought a 1999 thinking all of the initial problems should have been fixed by then - wrong! Can you say nikasil, tensioners, water pump, thermostat? It took Jaguar until about 2003 with the advent of the 4.2L to get everything corrected. They also had some problems with the first XFs if I am correct. It also seems from this forum that the first XKs had some too although much less than the first XK8s. First year problems are not exclusive to Jaguar. I remember when Lexus first came out with the RX SUV it hurt their J.D. Power quality ratings for a couple of years. No-way would I consider the first couple of years of the F-type. I'm waiting for the coupe version anyway.

 

On the other hand I bought the XJ-S convertible when it first came out and sold it six months later for a profit.

 

A big plus for the F Type is that many of the electronic and mechanical systems have been borrowed from existing platforms in the Jaguar/Land Rover line. SO many of the systems have been tested and improved over the years. Much of the F Type isn't exactly "new".

The build of the aluminum frame/chassis is routine with Jaguars manufacturing process. We can debate whether some of the car should have been carbon fiber...that certainly would have driven the cost up significantly, and cost is one of the things Jaguar is using to make this car competitive. The electronics are all from other platforms, the engine is the same as that in the existing Jaguar cars now. The suspension probably has some new design aspects. The onboard computer systems have new software designed to manage the particular performance characteristics of the F Type, but I would bet they did not start from scratch there either.

So, they should be able to produce a reliable car from the beginning. It may need some tweeking here and there but that is normal and Jag should not be judged harshly for that. But things like engine misfires, "bits" here and there not fitting together properly (like with the convertible top), or other quality or reliability issues will be especially hard on Jag given that old rep it had in the past.

However, people of today are spoiled. The engineering and technology that goes into designing and building these cars are *extremely* complex. For some people, if one of these technological marvels isn't perfect they trash the whole car and the brand.

 

No doubt. The XK will become a 4 seater. The XK tried to be both which was it's disadvantage. Now with the F Type filling the roll of a sports car the XK can be allowed to grow in size. Judging by Ian Callums work on the last 4 Jag's I don't think we need to be concerned with how good it will look, and being aluminum it's won't grow much in weight. Look at the weight difference between a XJ and XJL. It's not noticable.

 

295/30's indeed. I was fortunate enough to test drive a V6 yesterday in Inverness and I so want one now It may have 60bhp less than my XKR, but it felt much much quicker ......................

 

That is good to hear. Which V6 model did you test drive? Base (340HP) or the S (380) HP. For most people how a car "feels" is more important how it actually performs against a clock or test track.

Did it feel quicker than a 4.2 or 5.0 XKR? Acceleration felt quicker or the handling. Would appreciate if you could give us the details.

Albert

 

V6 S Albert. It was indeed how it felt that has got me interested. Both really, although the acceleration was enhanced by the noise in sport and dynamic mode. The handling was superb but I found that you had to keep the revs in the 4000 range for best pull, below that it felt ever so slightly sluggish.
It is a licence loser for sure if you don't keep check on the speedo as the noise just urges you on.
And it fits like a glove; in the XKR my seats ar not supportive enough to hurl it through the corners, the F on the other hand held you in perfectly. The salesman did say that there were no vanity mirrors, cubby holes or much boot space - who cares!! He said that on his training in Portugal, the 5.0 V8 took a bit of practice to get used to on the trac due to the immense power and ability to break traction.
Be interesting to see what our Jeremy makes of it on Top Gear once tested.

 

rscultho,
I wanted to address the depreciation question with regard to the F-type. Although for selfish reasons I would love to see them depreciate rapidly so that I could add yet another car to my collection, I think we need only to look to BMW's Z-8, probably the closest looking automobile to the F-type ( I like the F-type's looks better, especially when the top is up, the BMW is too tall). More than 10 years after introduction, they have not lost much if any value and in some cases have appreciated. The limited production numbers probably has much to do with that, but the F-type's performance should easily trounce that of the Z-8. Since the F-type's numbers will be relatively small, it will be interesting to see the depreciation (or lack thereof) schedule.

 

You still have young kids, don't you?
I remember having to watch Lion King over and over with my daughter.

I keep reading the XK is going upscale. In price and in status. To be a closer competitor to the Gran Turismo and Aston Martin.

 

I'm not sure why the company would need a GT car if sales of the F-type take off. They would have a luxury town car, a family sedan and a sporty 2-seater. I do see room for a slick styled Jaguar SUV to compete with the Porsche. Obviously they could borrow heavily from the LR Evoke.